Data Collection Survey Sri Lanka SWM PDF

Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
in Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

Data Collection Survey on Solid Waste Management
Data Collection Survey on Solid Waste
Management in Democratic Socialist
Republic of Sri Lanka
Final Report
Final Report
February 2016
February 2016
Japan International Cooperation Agency

(JICA)
Kokusai Kogyo Co., Ltd.
環境
JR
16-029
3　英文　本編 115535.240803.28.2.18　作業；047
.
.
Ten (10) Priority Local Authorities

Contents
1 Background and Objective of Survey .......................................................1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................ 1
1.2 Objective ................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Outline of the survey .............................................................................. 2
1.4 Survey period ......................................................................................... 2
1.5 Survey area............................................................................................. 2
1.5.1 Selection of survey candidates local authority............................................. 2
1.5.2 Priority local authority ................................................................................. 3
1.6 Government organization, institute and local authority to be studies .... 6
1.7 Survey schedule ..................................................................................... 6
2 Basic Information of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka .......8
2.1 Summary ................................................................................................ 8
2.2 Natural environmental condition ........................................................... 8
2.3 Socio-Economic Conditions .................................................................. 9
2.3.1 Social Conditions ......................................................................................... 9
2.3.2 Economic Conditions ................................................................................. 11
2.3.3 Penetration of Japanese-affiliated Companies into the Country ................ 12
2.4 Administrative Division ....................................................................... 13
2.4.1 District and Division .................................................................................. 13
2.4.2 Province and Local Authority .................................................................... 14
2.5 Institutional System According to the Waste Management ................. 15
2.5.1 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions ............................................. 15
2.5.2 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions in Western Province ............. 19
3 Current Status and Issues of the Solid Waste Management Sector ......22
3.1 National Level Plan and Strategy......................................................... 22
3.2 Laws and Regulations related to Waste ............................................... 23
3.2.1 Waste Management.................................................................................... 23
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) ................................................. 26
3.3 Current Situation of Waste Management Sector.................................. 31
3.3.1 Collection and Disposal Amounts of General Waste................................. 31
3.3.2 Intermediate Treatment .............................................................................. 32
3.3.3 Industrial Waste ......................................................................................... 33
3.3.4 Medical Waste ........................................................................................... 33
3.3.5 Waste to Energy ......................................................................................... 34
3.4 Outcome of Japanese Support for Solid Waste Management in Sri Lanka 36
3.4.1 Current Condition of Support by NSWMSC for Solid Waste Management of Local
Authorities ................................................................................................ 36
3.4.2 Outlook of the utilization of the guideline for planning, management, and pollution control of
waste landfills by SATREPS .................................................................... 37
3.5 The SWM Problems at the National Level .......................................... 39
3.6 Other Donor’s Activities ...................................................................... 40
3.6.1 United Nations Office for Project Services（UNOPS） .............................. 40
3.6.2 KOICA ....................................................................................................... 41
3.6.3 Korean Economic Development Cooperation Fund（EDCF） .................... 42
3.6.4 Asian Development Bank (ADB) .............................................................. 42
3.6.5 World Bank ................................................................................................ 43
3.6.6 VNG International (International Co-operation Agency of the Association of Netherlands
Municipalities) & Velsen helps Galle Foundation.................................... 43
3.6.7 Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) .......................................... 44
3.6.8 SEVANATHA Urban Resource Center..................................................... 44
3.6.9 Energy Forum ............................................................................................ 44
3.6.10 Sri Lankan Government ............................................................................ 44
4 Basic Information of the Priority Local Authorities..................................48

4.1 Kataragama Pradeshiya Sabahas in Uva Province - ............................ 48
4.1.1 Outline of the LA (Local Authority).......................................................... 48
4.1.2 Current Status and Problems of Solid Waste Management ....................... 48
4.1.3 Waste Amount and Composition Survey ................................................... 63
4.1.4 The Result of Public Opinion Survey ........................................................ 64
4.1.5 Waste Flow (2015） .................................................................................... 66
4.1.6 Current Situation of Other Waste Management......................................... 67
4.1.7 Needs for Solid Waste Management.......................................................... 68
4.2 Thamankaduwa Pradeshiya Sabha in North-Central Province ............ 69
4.2.1 Outline of the Local Authority................................................................... 69
4.2.2 Current Situation and Problems of Solid Waste Management .................. 69
4.2.3 Waste Amount and Composition ............................................................... 79
4.2.4 Results of the Public Opinion Survey ........................................................ 81
4.2.5 Waste Flow ................................................................................................ 82
4.2.7 Solid Waste Management Improvement Needs ......................................... 84
4.3 Jaffna Municipal Council in Northern Province .................................. 85
4.3.1 Outline of the LA ....................................................................................... 85
4.3.2 Current Status and Problems of Solid Waste Management ....................... 85
4.3.3 Waste Amount and Composition Survey ................................................... 95
4.3.4 The results of the Public Opinion survey ................................................... 96
4.3.5 Waste flow ................................................................................................. 98
4.3.7 Needs for Solid Waste Management........................................................ 100
4.4 Trincomalee Urban Council in Eastern Province .............................. 101
4.4.1 Outline of the LA ..................................................................................... 101
4.4.2 Current Status and Problems of Solid Waste Management ..................... 101
4.4.3 Waste Amount and Composition Survey ................................................. 110
4.4.4 The results of the Public Opinion Survey ................................................ 112
4.4.5 Waste flow ............................................................................................... 114
4.4.6 Current Situation of Other Waste Management....................................... 114
4.5 Kurunegala Municipal Council in Northern Western Province ......... 116
4.5.1 Outline of the LA ..................................................................................... 116
4.5.3 Waste amount and Waste composition .................................................... 127
4.5.4 The result of public opinion survey ......................................................... 129
4.5.5 Waste flow ............................................................................................... 131
Source: Kurunegala MC ..................................................................................... 133
4.6 Nuwara Eliya Municipal Council in Central Province ...................... 134
4.6.1 Outline of the LA ..................................................................................... 134
4.6.4 The results of the Public Opinion Survey ................................................ 146
4.6.5 Waste flow ............................................................................................... 149
4.7 Moratuwa Municipal Council in Western Province .......................... 152
4.7.1 Outline of the Local Authority (LA) ........................................................ 152
4.7.4 Results of Public Opinion Survey ............................................................ 171
4.7.5 Waste Flow .............................................................................................. 173
4.7.7 Solid Waste Management Needs ............................................................. 174
4.8 Kesbewa Urban Council in Western Province ................................... 176
4.8.1 Outline of the Local Authority................................................................. 176
4.8.5 Waste Flow .............................................................................................. 190
4.9 Katunayake Seeduwa Urban Council in Western Province ............... 193
4.9.1 Outline of the Local Authority................................................................. 193
4.9.5 Waste Flow .............................................................................................. 208
4.10 Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia Municipal Council in Western Province ........ 212
4.10.1 Outline of the LA .................................................................................... 212
4.10.2 Current Status and Problems of Solid Waste Management .................... 212
4.10.3 Waste Amount and Composition Survey ................................................ 226
4.10.4 Results of Public Opinion Survey ........................................................... 227
4.10.5 Waste Flow ............................................................................................. 229
4.10.6 Current Situation of Other Waste Management...................................... 230
4.10.7 Needs for Solid Waste Management....................................................... 231
5 Projection of Waste Generation Amount and Waste Composition .......233

5.1 Population Projection ......................................................................... 233
5.2 Projection of Waste Generation Amount ........................................... 235
5.2.1 Waste Generation Rate ............................................................................ 235
5.2.2 Waste Generation Unit............................................................................. 235
5.2.3 Generation Amount.................................................................................. 235
5.3 Projection of Waste Composition ...................................................... 236
5.3.1 Basis for Prediction .................................................................................. 236
5.3.2 Future Waste Composition ...................................................................... 237
6 Possibility of Support for Solid Waste Management ............................240

6.1 Issues and needs ................................................................................. 240
6.2 Assistance in accordance with the inter-municipal treatment for Western Province 243
6.2.1 Current situations and issues of solid waste management in Western Province 243
6.2.2 Future generation amount of municipal solid waste in the Western province250
6.2.3 Study on the intermediate treatment in Colombo District ....................... 252
6.3 Assistance for Local Authorities in other than Western Province ..... 261
6.3.1 Issues of Solid Waste Management of local authorities in other than Western Province 261
6.3.2 Improvement of SWM at local authorities in other than Western Province262
6.4 Financial System ................................................................................ 263
6.4.1 Public Financial System in Sri Lanka ...................................................... 263
6.4.2 Possibilities of Financing SWM Improvement Projects .......................... 272
6.5 Improvement of SWM ....................................................................... 277
6.5.1 Schedule of improvement of SWM in short term and mid term .............. 277
6.5.2 Technical Needs ....................................................................................... 277
6.5.3 Planning M/P &F/S .................................................................................. 278
6.5.4 Facility development................................................................................ 279
Contents of Figure
Figure 1-1: Flow chart to select 10 priority local authorities .................................................................. 4

Figure 1-2: Survey schedule .................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-1: Share of Companies by Operated Years in Sri Lanka ........................................................ 13
Figure 2-2: Diagram of Government Agency Relationship in Sri Lanka .............................................. 15
Figure 2-3: Organizational Chart of the NSWMSC .............................................................................. 18
Figure 2-4: Organizational Chart of the CEA ....................................................................................... 18
Figure 2-5: Organizational Chart of the WMA ..................................................................................... 21
Figure 3-1: The flow of EIA procedure by PAA ................................................................................... 28
Figure 3-2: The flow of EIA procedure by CCD................................................................................... 29
Figure 4-1: Organizational chart of whole Kataragama PS ................................................................... 49
Figure 4-2 Organizational chart of SWM section in Kataragama PS .................................................... 50
Figure 4-3: Waste collection area and disposal sites in Kataragama PS (as of Nov. 2015) .................. 52
Figure 4-4: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kataragama PS ....................................... 64
Figure 4-5: Method of garbage discharge by residences in KPS area ................................................... 65
Figure 4-6: Willingness of residences to participate in the source separated garbage collection system
in the Kataragama PS ................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 4-7: Waste Flow of Kataragama PS (2015) ............................................................................... 66
Figure 4-8: The organization chart of the Thamankaduwa PS .............................................................. 70
Figure 4-9: The organization chart of SWM in Thamankaduwa PS ..................................................... 70
Figure 4-10: Map of the Thamankaduwa PS ......................................................................................... 71
Figure 4-11: Location of the disposal site ............................................................................................. 75
Figure 4-12: A satellite image of the disposal site ................................................................................ 76
Figure 4-13: Availability of garbage collection service in the Thamankaduwa PS............................... 81
Figure 4-14 Method of garbage discharge by residences in the Thamankaduwa PS area ..................... 81
in the Thamankaduwa PS ............................................................................................................. 82
Figure 4-16: Current waste flow in the Thamankaduwa PS (2015) ...................................................... 83
Figure 4-17: Organizational chart of the Jaffna MC ............................................................................. 86
Figure 4-18: location of incoming waste from three local authorities to the Kallundai disposal site .... 90
Figure 4-19: Satellite image of Kallundai disposal site ......................................................................... 90
Figure 4-20: Availability of garbage collection service in the Jaffna MC ............................................ 97
Figure 4-21: Method of garbage discharge by residence in JMC area .................................................. 97
Figure 4-22: Willingness of residences to participate in a source separated garbage collection system in
Jaffna MC ..................................................................................................................................... 98
Figure 4-23: Waste flow of the Jaffna MC (2015) ................................................................................ 99
Figure 4-24: Organizational chart of Trincomalee UC........................................................................ 102
Figure 4-25: Location of incoming waste from two local authorities to the Kanniya disposal site..... 105
Figure 4-26: Satellite image of the Kanniya disposal site ................................................................... 106
Figure 4-27: Availability of garbage collection service in the Trincomalee UC ................................. 112
Figure 4-28: Method of garbage discharge by residence in the TUC area .......................................... 112
in Trincomalee UC ..................................................................................................................... 113
Figure 4-30: Waste flow in Trincomalee UC (2015)........................................................................... 114
Figure 4-31: Organizational chart of the Kurunegala MC................................................................... 117
Figure 4-32: The solid waste flow for collecting, hauling and disposing in Kurunegala MC ............. 121
Figure 4-33: Satellite photograph of Sundarapola final disposal site .................................................. 122
Figure 4-34: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kurunegala MC .................................. 129
Figure 4-35: Method of garbage discharge by residences in the KMC area ....................................... 130
in the Kurunegala MC ................................................................................................................ 130
Figure 4-37: Current waste flow in Kurunegala MC （2015） ......................................................... 131
Figure 4-38: Organizational chart of the Nuwara Eliya MC ............................................................... 135
Figure 4-39: Solid Waste Collection Area in Nuwara Eliya MC ........................................................ 137
Figure 4-40: Location of Moon Plain final disposal site of the Nuwara Eliya MC ............................. 140
Figure 4-41: Satellite image of Moon plain disposal site .................................................................... 141
Figure 4-42: Availability of garbage collection service in the Nuwara Eliya MC .............................. 147
Figure 4-43: Method of garbage discharge by residences in NEMC area ........................................... 147
in the Nuwara Eliya MC ............................................................................................................. 148
Figure 4-45: Waste flow of the Nuwara Eliya MC (2015) .................................................................. 149
Figure 4-46: Organizational chart of Moratuwa MC........................................................................... 153
Figure 4-47：Example of method of waste separation and storage at a household ............................ 154
Figure 4-48: Waste collection zones in Moratuwa MC ....................................................................... 155
Figure 4-49: Location map of the Karadiyana DS .............................................................................. 159
Figure 4-50: Plan map of Karadiyana DS ........................................................................................... 160
Figure 4-51: Plan of Karadiyana Waste Management Plaza ............................................................... 162
Figure 4-52: Availability of garbage collection service in the Moratuwa MC .................................... 171
Figure 4-53: Method of garbage discharge by residence in MMC area .............................................. 172
in the Moratuwa MC................................................................................................................... 172
Figure 4-55: Waste Flow of Moratuwa MC (2015)............................................................................. 173
Figure 4-56: Organizational chart of SWM section in Kesbewa UC .................................................. 177
Figure 4-57: Collection area by zones in Kesbewa UC (as of Nov. 2015) .......................................... 179
Figure 4-58: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kesubewa UC .................................... 188
Figure 4-59: Method of garbage discharge by residence in KUC area................................................ 188
in the Kesbewa UC ..................................................................................................................... 189
Figure 4-61: Waste Flow of Kesbewa UC (2015) ............................................................................... 190
Figure 4-62: Organizational chart of Katunayake Seeduwa UC ......................................................... 195
Figure 4-63: Collection area in Katunayake Seeduwa UC (as of Nov. 2015) ..................................... 197
Figure 4-64: Availability of garbage collection service in the Katunayake-Seeduwa MC.................. 207
Figure 4-65: Method of garbage discharge by residence in KSUC area ............................................. 207
in the Katunayake-Seeduwa MC ................................................................................................ 208
Figure 4-67: Waste Flow of Katunayake Seeduwa UC ....................................................................... 209
Figure 4-68: Organizational chart of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ........................................................ 213
Figure 4-69: Organizational chart of SWM section in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ............................. 214
Figure 4-70: Separate collection is in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (as of Nov. 2015) .......................... 216
Figure 4-71: Availability of garbage collection service in the DMMC ............................................... 228
Figure 4-72: Method of garbage discharge by residences in the DMMC area .................................... 228
in the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ................................................................................................ 229
Figure 4-74: Waste Flow of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (2015) .......................................................... 230
Figure 5-1:Current and Predicted Future Waste Composition of the Target LAs ............................... 239
Figure 6-1: A variety of intermediate treatment methods of municipal solid waste............................ 256
Figure 6-2: Forecast of quality of garbage for incineration ................................................................. 257
Figure 6-3: Number of Loans Released by LLDF ............................................................................... 273
Figure 6-4: Loans Compiled by Project Types (Total=2.5 Billion LKR) ........................................... 274
Figure 6-5: The schedule of improvement of SWM in short-term and mid-term................................ 277
Contents of Table
Table 1-1: Support for improving SWM by the government of Japan .................................................... 1
Table 1-2: Thirty three (33) local authorities as survey candidates selected at the stakeholder meetings.
........................................................................................................................................................ 3
Table 1-3: Criteria to select 10 priority local authorities ......................................................................... 4
Table 1-4: Evaluation of 33 local authorities as survey candidate .......................................................... 5
Table 1-5: 10 priority local authorities .................................................................................................... 6
Table 2-1: General information of Sri Lanka .......................................................................................... 8
Table 2-2: Average temperature and rainfall monthly in Colombo, Jaffna and Trincomalee ................. 8
Table 2-3: Average temperature and rainfall monthly in Kurungala, Katharagama and Nuwara Eliya .. 9
Table 2-4: Key Social Indicators of Sri Lanka ...................................................................................... 10
Table 2-5: Key Economic Indicators of Sri Lanka ................................................................................ 11
Table 2-6: List of Japanese-affiliated Companies Operating in Sri Lanka ............................................ 12
Table 2-7: Distribution of LAs by Province .......................................................................................... 14
Table 3-1: Plans and Policies/Strategies related to SWM ..................................................................... 22
Table 3-2: Legal Frameworks Related to SWM .................................................................................... 23
Table 3-3: Environmental Standards Related to SWM ......................................................................... 25
Table 3-4: Guidelines Related to SWM ................................................................................................ 25
Table 3-5: Act, Statute and Ordinance list which mandate EIA ............................................................ 26
Table 3-6: The Laws and regulations related to EIA ............................................................................. 29
Table 3-7: SWM Indicators of Sri Lanka .............................................................................................. 32
Table 3-8: Target waste diversion through composting (MoMDE, 2015) ............................................ 32
Table 3-9: Generation mix proposed by the National Energy Policies and Strategies (2008)............... 34
Table 3-10: Status of WtE projects in Sri Lanka ................................................................................... 35
Table 3-11: The Breakdown of Support Activities by NSWMSC for Local Authorities in 2012 ......... 36
Table 3-12: The Breakdown of Support Activities by NSWMSC for Local Authorities in 2013 ......... 37
Table 3-13: The table of contents of the guideline and the relevant organizations to be expected to
utilize it ......................................................................................................................................... 39
Table 3-14: Japanese Waste Management and Public Cleansing Law .................................................. 40
Table 3-15: The outline of EDCF project site ....................................................................................... 42
Table 3-16: Projects Related to the SWM of Each Donor..................................................................... 46
Table 4-1: Population Trend of Kataragama PS (2010-2015) ............................................................... 48
Table 4-2: Staff related to SWM in Kataragama PS.............................................................................. 50
Table 4-3: Waste collection methods and frequency of Kataragama PS ............................................... 52
Table 4-4: Collection fee for hotels in Kataragama PS ......................................................................... 53
Table 4-5: New collection fee after introduction of separate collection in Kataragama PS (not effective
as of Nov. 2015) ........................................................................................................................... 53
Table 4-6: Collection vehicles of Kataragama PS ................................................................................. 53
Table 4-7: Intermediate treatment facilities in Kataragama PS ............................................................. 54
Table 4-8: Purchase of valuable materials at Middleman Shop ............................................................ 59
Table 4-9: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Kataragama ....................................................... 60
Table 4-10: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Katharagama PS (Unit: Thousand LKR) ................ 60
Table 4-11: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Katharagama PS (Unit: thousand LKR) ..................... 61
Table 4-12: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Katharagama PS (Unit: Thousand LKR)......... 61
Table 4-13: Annual Revenues and Expenses of PHI Section (Unit: Thousand LKR)........................... 62
Table 4-14: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included) ................................................................................... 62
Table 4-15: Waste Generation Amount of Kataragama PS ................................................................... 63
Table 4-16: Waste Composition and Apparent Specific Gravity of Kataragama PS ............................ 64
Table 4-17: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size.................................... 64
Table 4-18: Dynamics of Population in Thamankaduwa PS (2012 to 2015) ........................................ 69
Table 4-19: Staff related to SWM in Thamankaduwa PS ..................................................................... 70
Table 4-20: Collection equipment of the Thamankaduwa PS ............................................................... 72
Table 4-21: Waste collection frequency ................................................................................................ 72
Table 4-22: Intermediate treatment facility in the Thamankaduwa PS ................................................. 73
Table 4-23: Detailed information about the disposal site of the Thamankaduwa PS ............................ 75
Table 4-24: Recyclable trading prices at private recycling facilities ..................................................... 76
Table 4-25: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Thamankaduwa PS (Unit: Thousand LKR) ............ 77
Table 4-26: Breakdown of Annual Revenue ofThamankaduwa PS (Unit: thousand LKR) .................. 78
Table 4-27: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Thamankaduwa PS (Unit: Thousand LKR) .... 78
Table 4-28: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Health Section (Unit: Thousand LKR) ...................... 79
Table 4-29: Waste collection and transportation costs .......................................................................... 79
Table 4-30: Waste disposal costs .......................................................................................................... 79
Table 4-31: The generation amount of MSW in the Thamankaduwa PS .............................................. 80
Table 4-32: Waste composition of the Thamankaduwa PS ................................................................... 80
Table 4-34: Population Trend of Jaffna MC (2010-2015)..................................................................... 85
Table 4-35: Staff related to SWM in the Jaffna MC ............................................................................. 87
Table 4-36: Waste collection charge in the Jaffna MC ......................................................................... 88
Table 4-37: Intermediate treatment facility in the Jaffna MC ............................................................... 88
Table 4-38 Detail of Kallundai disposal site ......................................................................................... 89
Table 4-39: the price of each valuable material .................................................................................... 91
Table 4-40: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Jaffna MC (Unit: Thousand LKR) .......................... 93
Table 4-41: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Jaffna MC (Unit: thousand LKR) ............................... 93
Table 4-42: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Jaffna MC (Unit: Thousand LKR) .................. 94
Table 4-43: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Public Health Engineering Division of Jaffna MC
(Unit: Thousand LKR).................................................................................................................. 94
Table 4-44: Total cost of waste collection of Jaffna MC (2015) ........................................................... 95
Table 4-45: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Jaffna MC (2015) ..................................... 95
Table 4-46: Waste Generation Amount of Jaffna MC........................................................................... 96
Table 4-47: Waste Composition of the Jaffna MC ................................................................................ 96
Table 4-49: Population Trend of Trincomalee UC (2010-2014) ......................................................... 101
Table 4-50: Staff related to SWM in Trincomalee UC........................................................................ 102
Table 4-51: Waste collection charge in the Trincomalee UC .............................................................. 103
Table 4-52: Intermediate treatment facility in Trincomalee UC ......................................................... 104
Table 4-53: Details of Kanniya disposal site ....................................................................................... 105
Table 4-54: Prices of each valuable (recyclable) material ................................................................... 107
Table 4-55: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Trincomalee UC (Unit: Thousand LKR) .............. 108
Table 4-56: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Trincomalee UC (Unit: thousand LKR) ................... 108
Table 4-57: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Trincomalee UC (Unit: Thousand LKR)....... 109
Table 4-58: Annual Revenues and Expenses of SWM of Trincomalee UC (Unit: Thousand LKR) .. 109
Table 4-59: Total cost of waste collection of Jaffna MC (2015) ......................................................... 110
Table 4-60: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Trincomalee UC (2015).......................... 110
Table 4-61: The generation amount of MSW in the Trincomalee UC ................................................ 111
Table 4-62: Waste Composition of the Trincomalee UC (quoted from the Kanniya UC) .................. 111
Table 4-63: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size.................................. 112
Table 4-64: Population Trend of the Kurunegala MC (2010-2015) .................................................... 116
Table 4-65: Staff related to SWM in the Kurunegala MC................................................................... 118
Table 4-66: The list of collection method, target area, frequency and target waste ............................ 118
Table 4-67: Collection vehicles and equipment of the Kurunegala MC ............................................. 119
Table 4-68: The personnel composition of the work shop in Kurunegala MC ................................... 119
Table 4-69：Intermediate treatment facilities in Kurunegala MC ...................................................... 120
Table 4-70：Tipping fee at the Sundarapola final disposal site for solid waste ................................. 121
Table 4-71: Detailed information about the disposal site of the Kurunegala MC ............................... 121
Table 4-72: The buying price and collection amount of recyclable waste in WMC ........................... 123
Table 4-73: The selling price, purchase price and collection amount of recyclable materials by
“middlemen” dealers in KMC .................................................................................................... 124
Table 4-74: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Kurunegala MC (Unit: Thousand LKR) ............... 125
Table 4-75: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Kurunegala MC (Unit: thousand LKR) .................... 125
Table 4-76: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Kurunegala MC (Unit: Thousand LKR) ....... 126
Table 4-77: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Municipal Health Department of Kurunegala MC
(Unit: Thousand LKR)................................................................................................................ 126
Table 4-78: Total cost of waste collection of Kurunegala MC (2015) ................................................ 127
Table 4-79: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Kurunegala MC (2015) .......................... 127
Table 4-80: SW generation amount in the Kurunegala MC ................................................................ 128
Table 4-81: Waste composition in Kurunegala MC ............................................................................ 129
Table 4-83: Tipping fee for night soil in the Kurunegala MC ............................................................. 133
Table 4-84: Population Trend of Nuwara Eliya MC (2012-2015) ...................................................... 134
Table 4-85: Staff related to SWM in the Nuwara Eliya MC ............................................................... 136
Table 4-86: Solid waste collection vehicles owned by the Nuwara Eliya MC .................................... 137
Table 4-87: Frequency of solid waste collection of the Nuwara Eliya MC......................................... 138
Table 4-88: Intermediate treatment facility in the Nuwara Eliya MC ................................................. 139
Table 4-89: Detail of Moon plain disposal site ................................................................................... 141
Table 4-90: the Buying Price of Valuable Material............................................................................. 142
Table 4-91: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Nuwara Eliya MC(Unit:Thousand LKR) .............. 143
Table 4-92: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Jaffna MC (Unit: thousand LKR) ............................. 143
Table 4-93: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Nuwara Eliya MC (Unit:Thousand LKR) ..... 144
Table 4-94: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Health Department of Nuwara Eliya MC (Unit:
Thousand LKR) .......................................................................................................................... 144
Table 4-95: Waste collection cost in Nuwara Eliya (2015) ................................................................. 145
Table 4-96: Waste Generation Amount of the Nuwara Eliya MC ...................................................... 146
Table 4-97: Waste Composition of the Nuwara Eliya MC.................................................................. 146
Table 4-99: collection and treatment fee of night soil charged by the Nuwara Eliya MC .................. 151
Table 4-100: Population of Moratuwa MC (2010-2015) .................................................................... 152
Table 4-101: Staff related to SWM in Moratuwa MC ......................................................................... 154
Table 4-102: Waste collection methods and frequencies in Moratuwa MC ........................................ 155
Table 4-103: Collection vehicles of Moratuwa MC ............................................................................ 156
Table 4-104: Manufactured year of the collection vehicles ................................................................ 156
Table 4-105: An intermediate treatment facility operated by Moratuwa MC ..................................... 158
Table 4-106: Facilities of Karadiyana DS ........................................................................................... 159
Table 4-107: Equipment of Karadiyana DS ........................................................................................ 160
Table 4-108: The amount of valuable recovery by waste picker ......................................................... 161
Table4-109: Plan for Karadiyana Waste Management Plaza .............................................................. 161
Table 4-110: Amount of waste received at Karadiyana DS for final disposal .................................... 163
Table 4-111: Amount of waste received at the Karadiyana DS from January to August, 2015 .......... 163
Table 4-112: Information of recyclable trading by the middleman shop ............................................ 165
Table 4-113: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Moratuwa MC............................................. 166
Table 4-114: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) ......................................... 167
Table 4-115: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Revenues (Unit: thousand LKR) ....................... 168
Table 4-116: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) ................ 168
Table 4-117: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand LKR) .......... 169
Table 4-118: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included), Unit: LKR/load** ................................................ 169
Table 4-119: Waste Generation Amount of Moratuwa MC (2015) .................................................... 170
Table4-120: Waste Composition of Moratuwa MC (2015)................................................................. 171
Table4-121: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size................................. 171
Table4-122: Population Trend of Kesbewa UC (2010-2015) ............................................................. 176
Table4-123: Staff related to SWM in Kesbewa UC ............................................................................ 178
Table4-124: Waste collection methods and frequency of Kesbewa UC ............................................. 180
Table4-125: Collection fee of Kesbewa UC........................................................................................ 180
Table4-126: Collection vehicles of Kesbewa UC ............................................................................... 181
Table 4-127: Intermediate treatment facilities in Kesbewa UC .......................................................... 181
Table 4-128: Purchase of valuable materials at a Middleman Shop.................................................... 183
Table 4-129: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Kesbewa UC ............................................... 183
Table 4-130: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) ......................................... 184
Table 4-131: Breakdowns of the Annual Revenues (Unit: thousand LKR) ........................................ 184
Table 4-132: Breakdowns of the Annual Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) ................................. 185
Table 4-133: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand LKR) .......... 185
Table 4-134: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included), Unit: LKR/ton ...................................................... 186
Table 4-135: Waste Generation Amount of Kesbewa UC (2015) ....................................................... 187
Table 4-136: Waste Composition of Kesbewa UC (2015) .................................................................. 187
Table 4-137: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size................................ 188
Table 4-138: Population Trend of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (2010-2015) ......................................... 193
Table 4-139: Staff related to SWM in Katunayake Seeduwa UC ....................................................... 195
Table 4-140: Waste collection methods and frequency of Katunayake Seeduwa UC......................... 198
Table4-141: Collection fee of Katunayake Seeduwa UC .................................................................... 198
Table4-142: Collection vehicles of Katunayake Seeduwa UC ............................................................ 199
Table 4-143: Intermediate treatment facilities in Katunayake Seeduwa UC ....................................... 200
Table 4-144: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Katunayake Seeduwa UC ........................... 202
Table 4-145: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
.................................................................................................................................................... 203
Table 4-146: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Revenue of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit:
thousand LKR) ........................................................................................................................... 203
Table 4-147Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
.................................................................................................................................................... 204
Table 4-148: The Annual Budget and Actual Expenditure on SWM at Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit:
Thousand LKR) .......................................................................................................................... 204
Table 4-149: List of Waste Fees (Tax Included) ................................................................................. 205
Table 4-150: Waste Generation Amount of Katunayake Seeduwa UC ............................................... 206
Table 4-151: Waste Composition of Katunayake Seeduwa UC .......................................................... 206
Table 4-152: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size................................ 207
Table 4-153: Population Trend of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (2010-2015) ....................................... 212
Table4-154: Staff related to SWM in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ....................................................... 214
Table4-155: Waste collection methods and frecuency of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC......................... 216
Table4-156: Collection fee of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC .................................................................. 217
Table4-157: Collection vehicles of Dehiwala Mt. LaviniaMC ........................................................... 217
Table4-158: Manufactured year of collection vehicles in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ........................ 217
Table4-159: Intermediate treatment facilities in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ...................................... 220
Table4-160: Purchase of valuable materials at Middleman Shop ....................................................... 221
Table4-161: Collection amount of valuables by collection workers（Apr. 2014～Mar. 2015） ....... 222
Table4-162: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia (including future plans)
.................................................................................................................................................... 223
Table4-163: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) .......................................... 224
Table4-164: Breakdowns of Annual Revenues of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (Unit: thousand LKR) 224
Table4-165: Breakdowns of Total Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR) ........................................... 225
Table4-166: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand LKR) ........... 226
Table4-167: Waste Generation Amount of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC .............................................. 227
Table4-168: Waste Composition of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC ......................................................... 227
Table4-169: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size................................. 228
Table5-1: Population projections for 2015 .......................................................................................... 233
Table 5-2: Population Projection from 2015 to 2024 .......................................................................... 233
Table5-3: Population Projection from 2015 to 2024 ........................................................................... 234
Table5-4: Survey Results Applied for the Waste Generation Rate ..................................................... 235
Table5-5: Projection of Waste Generation Amount of Target LAs..................................................... 236
Table5-6: Survey Results Applied for the Waste Composition ........................................................... 236
Table5-7: Proportion Applied for Future Generation Amount ............................................................ 237
Table5-8: Population Growth Rate and Economic Growth Rate Adopted in Future Estimates .......... 237
Table 6-1: The summary of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities ..................................... 240
Table 6-2: The detail of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities ........................................... 241
Table6-3: Population and population density of the Western Province in 2012 ................................. 243
Table 6-4: Financial information of local authorities in Colombo District for the fiscal year 2014 (Unit:
thousand Rp)............................................................................................................................... 246
Table 6-5: SWM finance of local authorities in Colombo District for the fiscal year 2014 ................ 247
Table 6-6: Financial information of local authorities in Gampaha District for the fiscal year 2014 (Unit:
thousand Rp)............................................................................................................................... 248
Table 6-7: SWM finance of local authorities in Gampaha District for the fiscal year 2014 ............... 249
Table 6-8: The population growth rate for the Western province ....................................................... 250
Table 6-9: The future population of the Western province ................................................................. 250
Table 6-10: Estimated future waste generation rates for the Western province (Unit: g/person/day) . 251
Table 6-11: Future waste generation amounts for the Western province (unit: ton/day) .................... 251
Table6-12: Disposal amount of three sites in Colombo District (Unit: ton/day) ................................. 252
Table6-13: Physical composition of object garbage............................................................................ 253
Table6-14: Calculation of low calorific value ..................................................................................... 253
Table6-15: C/N ratio of organic garbage............................................................................................. 254
Table6-16: Possibility of the middle processing seen from refuse composition ................................. 255
Table6-17: Case study ......................................................................................................................... 256
Table6-18: Cost of each case............................................................................................................... 257
Table6-19: Number of incinerators by capacity in Japan .................................................................... 258
Table6-20: Number of bio-gasification plants in Japan ...................................................................... 258
Table 6-21: Category and Issues of Solid Waste Management of priority local authorities in other than
Western Province........................................................................................................................ 261
Table 6-22: Lists of Roles and Functions for National and Subnational Governments....................... 263
Table 6-23: Roles and Functions of Local Authorities ........................................................................ 264
Table 6-24: Own-source Revenues of Provincial Councils and Local Authorities ............................. 265
Table 6-25: Major Own-source Revenues of Local Authorities.......................................................... 266
Table 6-26: Amounts of Block Grant Released from 2010 to 2013 (Unit: million LKR) ................... 267
Table 6-27: Amounts of PSDG Released from 2010 to 2013 (Unit: million LKR) ............................ 267
Table 6-28: Recurrent Expenditures of Provinces and LAs (Unit: million LKR) ............................... 269
Table 6-29: Recurrent Expenditures and Block Grant (Unit: million LKR) ....................................... 269
Table 6-30: Capital Expenditures of Provinces and Released Capital Grants (Unit: million LKR) .... 270
Table 6-31: SWM Finance in Some Local Authorities (Unit: Thous.LKR)........................................ 271
Table 6-32: Annual Interest Rates of LLDF Loans ............................................................................. 273
Table 6-33: Information of Loans Released to Local Authorities ....................................................... 273
Table 6-34: Loan Repayment Conditions by seven Target Local Authorities (Unit: LKR) ................ 274
Abbreviations
ACLG Assistant Commissioner of Local Government

ADB Asian Development Bank
CBO Community-Based Organization
CD Capacity Development
CDA Community Development Assistant
CDO Community Development Officer
CEA Central Environmental Authority
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
CLG Commissioner of Local Government
C/P Counter Part
CPHI Chief Public Health Inspector
CUP-NSWMSC Capacity Upgrading Project for National Solid Waste Management
Support Centre
DEO Divisional Environmental Officer
EDCF Economic Development Cooperation Fund
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EPL Environmental Protection License
EPR Extensive Producers Responsibilities
FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalities
F/S Feasibility Study
IEE Initial Environmental Examination
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
JST Japan Science and Technology Agency
KOICA Korean International Cooperation Agency
LA Local Authority
LKR Sri Lanka Rupee
LGIIP Local Government Infrastructure Development Fund
LLDF Local Loans and Development Fund
MC Municipal Council
M/M Minutes of Meeting
MoMDE Ministry of Mahaweli Development & Environment
MOH Medical Officer of Health
MoH Ministry of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine
MoLGPC Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Councils
MoPAHA Ministry of Public Administration and Home Affairs
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
MSWM Municipal Solid Waste Management
NEA National Environmental Act
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NSSWM National Strategy for Solid Waste Management
NSWMSC National Solid Waste Management Support Centre
O&M Operation and Maintenance
PC Provincial Council
PEA Provincial Environmental Authority
PHI Public Health Inspector
PS Pradeshiya Sabha
R/D Record of Discussion
SATREPS Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable
Development
S/C Steering Committee
SLILG Sri Lankan Institute of Local Governance
SWM Solid Waste Management
UC Urban Council
UDA Urban Development Authority
UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services
VAT Value-Added Tax
VBB Volume Based Bag
WMA Waste Management Authority
WtE Waste-to-Energy
3 Rs Reduce, Reuse and Recycle
Exchange rate： 1LKR = 0.871Yen (October, 2015)
.
Data Collection Survey on Solid Waste Management Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
in Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka Kokusai Kogyo Co., Ltd.
1 Background and Objective of Survey

1.1 Background
GNI per capita of Sri Lanka was 1,770 USD in 2008, while it was approximately 3,400 USD in
2014 and Sri Lanka has become a middle-income country. The main issues of Municipal Solid
Waste (MSW) in Sri Lanka were the discharge, storage, collection and transportation before
2009 and the government of Sri Lanka made significant efforts to improve these issues to
maintain the public sanitation environment. However, since 2009 the main issues have shifted to
establishing the proper intermediate treatment and final disposal to maintain environmental
considerations as a middle-income country.
In accordance with “Vision for A New Sri Lanka”the 10-year National Development Plan)
(2006-2016), the government of Sri Lanka has strengthened the feasible solid waste
management to overcome the following main issues:
 Establishment of National Solid Waste Management Support Center (NSWMSC) in
2006 by Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Council
 National Policy on Solid Waste Management (2007)
Pilisaru Programme (2008) by Central Environmental Authority (CEA) under Ministry of

Environment. 115 compost plants were constructed through the Pilisaru Programme.
The government of Japan supported the improvement of SWM in Sri Lanka as shown in the
following table:
Table 1-1: Support for improving SWM by the government of Japan
Duration Title of project Outline
2002-2003 Feasibility study project “The Study on Recommendation of SWM support
Improvement of Solid Waste Management in system to local authorities from the
Secondary Cities in Sri Lanka” by JICA central government
2007-2011 Technical support project ”Capacity The capacity upgrading of NSWMSC
Upgrading Project for the National Solid in accordance with the above
Waste Management Support Centre ” by mentioned recommendation of
JICA feasibility study
2014 Networking on Kita Q system composting by Technical support of Kita Q system
IGES composting at Kuliyapitiya Urban
Council
2011-2016 SATREPS project ”Development of Formulation of guide for the planning,
appropriate technologies for pollution management and pollution control of
control and environmental restoration of solid waste landfill (published March
solid waste landfill” by JICA 2016）
Despite making significant efforts, the improvement of SWM is still limited and there are issues
regarding the improper maintenance of disposal sites, insufficient improvement of disposal sites,
lack of volume reduction by separate collection and recycling, and late introduction of
intermediate treatment facility.
1.2 Objective
This survey consists of the following three objectives:
1
Objective of ・Survey the project results, such as the current status of the technical support
this survey to local authorities by NSWMSC and the utilization of guides regarding
planning, management and pollution control supported by the Japanese
government and the Sri Lanka government
・Survey the issue for the dissemination of project output of technical support
conducted by the Japanese government based on the collection of
information in terms of the current status of SWM at local authorities,
management of organizations, operations and maintenance, finance, and the
SWM system including generation, collection, transportation,
intermediate-treatment, recycling and final disposal.
・Identify priority issues and support needs. Once these have been identified,
study the possibility of providing support. If support is possible, look into
specific support measures.
1.3 Outline of the survey

The outline of the survey is described as following items in the final report.
1. Outline and objective of survey
2. Basic information of Sri Lanka
3. Current status and issues of solid waste management sector
4. Basic information of priority local authorities
5. Prediction of future waste amount and quality
6. Possibility of support for solid waste management
1.4 Survey period

This survey started from 24th July, 2015 and ended in 11th March, 2016.
1.5 Survey area
1.5.1 Selection of survey candidates local authority

Thirty two (32) local authorities as survey candidates were selected at the 1st stakeholder
meeting on 26 August 2015, furthermore another local authority was added at the 2nd
stakeholder meeting on 7 October 2015. As a consequence, thirty three (33) local authorities
were selected as survey candidate at the stakeholder meetings.
2
Table 1-2: Thirty three (33) local authorities as survey candidates selected at the
stakeholder meetings.
Waste Waste
collection collection
No Province Local authority No Province Local authority
amount amount
(ton/day) (ton/day)
1 Northern Karachchi PS 6 18 Uva Badulla MC 28
Vadamarachchi
2 Northern PS 5 19 Western Gampaha MC 17
(South-West)
3 North-Central Hingurakgoda PS 10 20 Western Negombo MC 68
Katunayake
4 Uva Kataragama PS 8 21 Western UC 35
Seeduwa
Kotikawatta
5 Southern Hambantota MC 8 22 Western PS 38
Mulleriyawa
6 Eastern Kinniya PS 6 23 Western Moratuwa MC 85
7 Western Kalutara PS 8 24 Western Kesbewa UC 54
8 North-central Thamankaduwa PS 10 25 Western Kolonnawa UC 30
9 Northern Jaffna MC 69 26 Western Maharagama UC 82
10 North-Central Anuradhapura MC 25 27 Western Kaduwela MC 85
11 Eastern Trincomalee UC 26 28 Western Kalutara UC 20
12 Eastern Batticaloa MC 60 29 Western Beruwela UC 14
13 North-Western Chilaw UC 18 30 Western Colombo MC 775
Dehiwela Mt.
14 North-Western Kurunegala MC 48 31 Western MC 170
Lavinia
Sri
15 Central Nuwara Eliya MC 21 32 Western Jayawardenapura MC 100
Kote
16 Sabaragamuwa Kegalle UC 15 33 Central Kandy MC 130
17 Sabaragamuwa Rathnapura MC 32
The selection criteria of 33 local authorities as survey candidate are shown as follows;
(1)There are serious issues of solid waste management.
(2)Daily waste collection amount
• Less than 10 ton/day: approximately 20% of all survey candidates
• 10-100 ton /day: approximately 70% of all survey candidates
• More than 100 ton/day: approximately 10% of all survey candidates
1.5.2 Priority local authority

The questionnaire survey and interview survey by phone call were conducted by the consultant
since September 2015.to realize the current status of solid waste management in 33 local
authorities as survey candidate selected at the stakeholder meetings. The data and information
of current condition of solid waste management were evaluated based on the following flow.
3
Survey candidates 33 LAs
Criteria of selection 1
3 Categories according to the waste
collection amount
• Less than 10 ton/day
Criteria of selection 2 (weighted score) • 10-100 ton /day
• Priority on SWM • More than 100 ton/day
• Waste collection
• Issue of SWM
• Priority on urban functions
Criteria of selection 3
• No other or future project
10 Priority LAs
Figure 1-1: Flow chart to select 10 priority local authorities
Table 1-3: Criteria to select 10 priority local authorities

Selection
Detail Criteria Weighting Remark
criteria 1
• There is a SWM Master High score is evaluated as high
No (-) Yes (+)
plan Intention to SWM
Priority of
SWM • The ratio of SWM
x<25% 25%< x<50% 50%<x Higher score is evaluated as higher
budget of the total LA
(-) (+) (++) Intention to SWM
budget
• Population density x<1,000 1,000< x<5,000 5,000<x Higher score is evaluated as more
Priority on (persons per km2) (-) (+) (++) people are effected by SWM
urban
functions • Importance as traffic Higher score is evaluated as more
No (-) Yes (+)
point people are effected by SWM
Waste x<25% 25%< x<50% 50%<x More score is evaluated as high
• Waste collection ratio
collection (++) (+) (-) necessity of collection improved
• Collection and
No issue (-) There is issue (+)
transportation of waste
• Compost plant No issue (-) There is issue (+)
More score is evaluated as high
• MRF No issue (-) There is issue (+) necessity of issue solve
Issue of • Bio-Gas No issue (-) There is issue (+)
SWM
• Night soil No issue (-) There is issue (+)
• Necessity of disposal Generally life span of new DS is
No (-) Yes (+)
site (DS) improvement longer than improved DS. New DS
• Necessity of new gives larger impact to SWM than
No (-) Yes (++) improved DS.
disposal site (DS)
33 local authorities as survey candidate are evaluated based on the data, information and
selection criteria in following table.
4
Table 1-4: Evaluation of 33 local authorities as survey candidate
Priority of SWM Urban function Issue
No. Province Local Authority important Intermediate Treatment Final disposal Total Future project
rate
score
(t/day)
location 3Rs
n&
Soil
tation
Night
SWM
budget
density
for traffic
W-collection
W-collection
Transpor
Collectio
Population
Compost MRF Bio gas Improvement New
Master plan
1 Northern Karachchi PS 6 - - - + ++ + - - - - - + - 5
Vadamarachchi
2 Northern PS 5 - + - - - - - - - - - + - 2
(South-West)
3 North-Central Hingurakgoda PS 10 - - - - + - - - - - - + - 2
4 Uva Kataragama PS 8 + + - + - + + - - + + + - 8
5 Southern Hambantota MC 8 - - - + - + + - - + - + - 5
6 Eastern Kinniya PS 6 + ++ - - ++ + - - - - - - ++ 8
7 Western Kalutara PS 8 - - + + + + - - - - + - 5
8 North-Central Thamankaduwa PS 10 - - + ++ + - - + + + + - 8
9 Northern Jaffna MC 69 - - ++ + - + + - + ++ 8
10 North-Central Anuradhapura MC 25 - - + + + - - - - + + - 5 EDCF
11 Eastern Trincomalee UC 26 - + ++ + + + - - - + + - 8
12 Eastern Batticaloa MC 60 - + + - - - - ++ 4 UNOPS
5
13 North-Western Chilaw UC 18 + + + - - - - - + ++ 6
14 North-Western Kurunegala MC 48 + + + - + + - - + + + - 8
15 Central Nuwara Eliya MC 21 + + + - + - - - + + - 6
16 Sabaragamuwa Kegalle UC 15 + + + - - + - - - - ++ 6
17 Sabaragamuwa Rathnapura MC 32 + - + + - + - - - + - - - 5
Korean
18 Uva Badulla MC 28 - - - + - - + + - - - - 3 company
19 Western Gampaha MC 17 + - + + + + - - + - - - 6
20 Western Negombo MC 68 + - + + - + + - - - - - 5
21 Western Katunayake Seeduwa UC 35 + ++ + - + - - + - + - 7
22 Western Kotikawatta Mulleriyawa PS 38 + - - + + + - - - - - ++ 6 KOICA
23 Western Moratuwa MC 85 - ++ ++ + - + - - - + - 7
24 Western Kesbewa UC 54 - - + + + + - - + - + - 6
25 Western Kolonnawa UC 30 + - ++ + - + + - - - - Meethotamurlla 6
26 Western Maharagama UC 82 - + + + - + - - - - - + - 5
27 Western Kaduwela MC 85 - - + + + + - - - + - + - 6
28 Western Kalutara UC 20 - - + + - + - - - + - + - 5
29 Western Beruwela UC 14 - + - - - + - - - - - + - 3
30 Western Colombo MC 775 + - ++ + - + - - - - - Meethotamurlla 5
31 Western Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC 170 - + ++ + - + - - - - - + - 6
32 Western Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte MC 100 - - ++ + - + - - - + - + - 6
33 Central Kandy MC 130 + - - + - - - - - - - + - 3 EDCF
33 local authorities were evaluated and 10 priority local authorities were selected at the 2nd
stakeholder meeting on 7th October 2015.
Table 1-5: 10 priority local authorities
Waste collection amount No. Province Local authority
1 Uva Kataragama PS
Less than 10 ton/day
2 North Central Thamankaduwa PS
3 Northern Jaffna MC
4 Eastern Trincomalee UC
5 North-Western Kurunegala MC
10-100 ton /day 6 Central Nuwara Eliya MC
7 Western Moratuwa MC
8 Western Kesbewa UC
9 Western Katunayake Seeduwa UC
More than 100 ton/day 10 Western Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
1.6 Government organization, institute and local authority to be studies

Government organization, institution and local authorities related on solid waste management
to be studied are shown as follows;
・ Ministry of Mahawelli Development and Environment【MoMD&E】
・ Central Environmental Authority【CEA】
・ Ministry of Provincial Council and Local Government
・ National Solid Waste Management Support Center【NSWMSC】
・ Urban Development Authority【UDA】
・ Ministry of National Policies & Economic Affairs, Department of National Planning【NPD】
・ Colombo Municipal Council【CMC】
・ 10 priority local authority
1.7 Survey schedule

This survey is conducted in three phases. Focus points in each phase are as follows:
•Period：End of July, 2015 - Beginning of October, 2015

•Time of Survey：The 1st Preparatory Work / 1st Field Survey/ 2nd Preparatory Work
•Purpose：To select approximately 30 LAs as survey candidates and collect data
Phase 1 about them. To select priority LAs (about 10 places)
•Period：Beginning of October, 2015 - Middle of January, 2016

•Time of Survey：The 2nd Field Survey / 3rd Preparatory Work
Phase 2 •Purpose：To decide 10 priority LAs and do in-depth surveys on them.
•Period：Middle of January, 2016 - End of February, 2016

•Time of Survey：The 3rd Field Survey / 4th Preparatory Work
•Purpose：To confirm details on technical cooperation needs and propose support
Phase 3 measures.
6
Detail survey schedule is as follows:

2015 2016
7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3
A.1 Study on Current Status of SWM
A.2 Preparation of questionnaire
A.3 Submission of IC/R
B.1 Explanation of IC/R and Discussion
B.2 Data Collection on SWM and Clarification of the Assistance Needs

Selection of the Priority LAs (approx.10 LAs) and Presentation of
C.1
Selection Rationale
Consideration on the Additional Items to be Studied and Discussion
C.2
of the Detailed Study Policy
D.1 Explanation of the 2nd Field Study Plan and discussion
Data collection survey in Preferred local authority

-D.2.1 Detailed survey on Solid Waste Management
D.2 -D.2.2Survey for final disposal site
-D.2.3Waste Composition Survey
-D.2.4Public Opinion Survey
Idenfication of issues and data collection on technologies and

E.1
experience in Japan which contribute to solving issues
Preparation of Draft Final Report and Discussion on the Direction of
E.2
Technical Cooperation
F.1 Presentation of Draft Final Report and Discussion
G.1 Submission of the Final Report
Report △ △ △
ICR DFR FR
Study in Sri Lanka
Study in Japan
Phase
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Figure 1-2: Survey schedule
7
2 Basic Information of the Democratic Socialist Republic of

Sri Lanka
2.1 Summary
Sri Lanka is located in south-southeast from the Indian subcontinent and separated from there
by their Poak Straits. The distance of Sri Lanka is 445km from north to south and 225km from
east to west, the coastline of Sri Lanka is approximately 1,340km long and the area is
65,610km2.
Table 2-1: General information of Sri Lanka

Country name the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
Capital city Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte
Government Parliamentary democracy
Population 20,360,000 (2012)
Labour force 7,860,000 (2012)
Average age 32.1 age (2015)
Language Official language: Sinhala and Tamil/Connected language: English
Reference: Census of Population and Housing – 2012 Sri Lanka Department of Census and Statistics
CIA HP：https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2177.html#ce
2.2 Natural environmental condition
Sri Lanka has a rainy season and dry season; it rains a lot in the southwest and highlands from
May to October from the southwest monsoon and in the north and northeast from November to
March from the northeast monsoon. The average temperature is 27 degrees Celsius in Colombo,
16 degrees Celsius in Nuwara Eliya; the climatic characteristic in Sri Lanka is small temperature
fluctuations throughout the year.
Table 2-2: Average temperature and rainfall monthly in Colombo, Jaffna and Trincomalee
LA Colombo Jaffna Trincomalee
Geography Western coastal area Northern coastal area Eastern coastal area
Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av.
Month Monthly av. temp
rainfall temp rainfall temp rainfall
1 31.5 32.7 25.3 92.8 29.8 36.2
2 27.8 122.5 25.6 22.7 30.3 184.1
3 31.4 220.9 27.9 - 32.0 68.7
4 31.9 267.7 30.7 8.5 33.6 48
5 31.9 169.2 30.5 80.6 34.8 122.6
6 31.3 237.8 31.3 8.1 35.3 22.3
7 31.2 37.3 30.9 1.6 36.0 9.5
8 31.3 90.7 29.7 108.5 35.9 30.7
9 30.6 631.4 28.9 35.7 34.7 255.6
10 30.8 235.4 28.2 262.1 31.9 393.8
11 30.9 525.8 26.2 496.4 30.3 647.7
12 31.4 376.6 26.2 251.6 30.3 211.1
Av. temp 31.0 - 28.5 - 32.9 -
Av. rainfall - 2948.0 - 1368.6 - 2030.3
8
Table 2-3: Average temperature and rainfall monthly in Kurungala, Katharagama and
Nuwara Eliya
LA Kurunegala Katharagama Nuwara Eliya
Geography Inland area Southern coastal area Plateau area
Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av. Monthly av.
Month
temp rainfall temp rainfall temp rainfall
1 32.2 5.9 32.0 7.5 20.6 1.9
2 32.8 34.3 32.5 37.2 19.7 248.1
3 34.5 207.2 32.5 57.2 21.7 42.7
4 33.3 367.5 31.8 137.7 22.0 123.9
5 32.8 159.8 31.0 48.8 21.8 203.9
6 32.2 76.4 31.5 18.7 20.2 130
7 32.6 20.1 31.2 31.9 19.4 96.9
8 33.0 74.3 30.7 159.3 19.8 75.3
9 32.2 125.0 29.7 300.8 20.4 234.5
10 31.9 282.5 30.7 163.8 20.7 318.4
11 31.4 422.0 30.9 228.2 20.5 280.2
12 31.3 275.2 31.0 125.3 19.7 265.4
Av. temp 32.5 - 31.3 - 20.5 -
Av. rainfall - 2050.2 - 1316.4 - 2021.2
Reference: Department of Meteorology
In 2004, more than 35,000 people died from the tsunami caused by the Sumatra earthquake.
The tsunami damaged coastal areas from the north and east to south and the fact that most of the
victims had never experienced earthquakes is considered to have significantly increased the
death toll.
2.3 Socio-Economic Conditions
2.3.1 Social Conditions

The total population of Sri Lanka was 20.7 million people as of 2014. The population density is
330 persons per sq.km and is highest in the western part of the country along the coast,
especially in and around the capital. The Sinhalese constitute the largest ethnic group in Sri
Lanka accounting for 72.9% of the total population. Other ethnic groups are Tamils and Sri
Lankan Moors occupying 18% and 8% of the total population respectively.
Sri Lanka is a multi-religious country. 70% of the Sri Lankans are Buddhists. The other
dominant religions are Hinduism and Islam since the Hindus and Muslims account for 10% and
8.5% of the total population, respectively.
The country is known for its social welfare system. The Government of Sri Lanka made many
efforts in its social welfare policies by implementing medical services free of charge and
introducing free education system from general to university levels. The compulsory education
in Sri Lanka is nine years, starting in primary school at age five. This aforementioned effort is
considered to have helped Sri Lanka achieve a literacy rate of 95%, which is relatively high
among developing countries. Sri Lanka also ranks highly on the Human Development Index;
0.75 in 2014 ranking it 73rd among 187 countries.
Other high educational rates in the country are the computer utilization rate at 35% and the
primary school enrolment rate at 98.5%.
In 2014, government spending on health and education was equal to 1.4% of GDP for the health
9
sector and 1.9% of GDP for the education sector.

However, the Gini coefficient increased to 0.48 in 2014 from 0.36 in 2010, indicating a
continuous increase in income disparity over the last four years. As for poverty, the Poverty
Head Count Index has decreased considerably from 15.2% to 6.7% since 2007.
The key social indicators of Sri Lanka are presented in the table below.
Table 2-4: Key Social Indicators of Sri Lanka
No Indicators Unit Value
1 Population thous.psn 20,675
2 Population density psn/sq.km 330
3 Literacy Rate percent 95.0%
4 Average household size psn/HH 3.9
5 Average household income LKR/HH/month 45,878
6 Income disparity (Gini coefficient) coefficient 0.48
7 Poverty Head Count Index
2006/2007 15.2
2009/2010 8.9
2012/2013 6.7
8 Human Development Index 0.75
Rank among 187 countries 73
9 Employment:
Employment at private sectors thous.psn 8,424
Agriculture percent 28.5%
Industry percent 26.5%
Services percent 45.0%
Employment at government sectors thous.psn 1,330
State sector percent 51.3%
Provincial public sector percent 29.0%
Semi government sector percent 19.7%
10 Education
General Education
Student/teacher ratio 18
Primary net enrolment ratio percent 98.5%
University Education
Student/teacher ratio 17
Enrolment ratio (age 19-23 years) percent 6.3%
Government expenditure on education percent of GDP 1.9%
11 Public Health
Hospital beds beds/1000 psn 3.7
Persons per doctor 1155
Nurses nurses/10000 psn 15.5
Government expenditure on health percent of GDP 1.4%
Source: Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2015, “Annual Report-2014”
For 26 years starting from 1983, Sri Lanka suffered an internal conflict that arose between the
Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), an anti-government militant
group based in northern Sri Lanka. The LTTE waged an insurgency against the government to
create an independent state in the north and east of the country for the Tamil people.
Sri Lanka has been facing challenges related to development, improvement of social services
and establishment of economic infrastructure in the areas affected by the conflict and areas hit
by the tsunami that occurred in 2004.
10
2.3.2 Economic Conditions

Since the end of the civil war, the economy of Sri Lanka has been improving continuously and
its GDP per capita reached 3,625 USD (nominal-base). Resulting from improvements of
economic activities and demand recovery, the national economic growth rate reached 8.2% in
2011, to date the highest on record. Despite the decrease to 6.3% in 2012, the economic growth
rate recovered during the following two years and reached 7.4% in 2014. The annual average
growth for the last four years was estimated at more than 6%.Although the Sri Lankan economy
was traditionally plantation-oriented and based mainly on production of tea, rubber and
coconuts, recent industrialization has been diversifying the economy. Annual output growth of
the industrial sector exceeded 10% for the past four years. Due to the recovery of employment
conditions driven by economic growth, the unemployment rate has continuously decreased and
dropped to 4.3% in 2014. Likely, the inflation rate stayed at levels below 10% and is estimated
at 3.3% in 2014. Although the exports increased by 7.1% in 2014 and exceeded 10 billion USD,
the deficit of external trade balance increased due to the faster increase rate of the imports (7.8%
increase from the 2013 level). Thanks to the improvement of public safety, the number of
tourists from abroad increased from 650,000 people in 2010 and reached over 1,000,000 people
for the third consecutive year. The major economic indicators of Sri Lanka are as follows.
Table 2-5: Key Economic Indicators of Sri Lanka
No Indicators Unit 2000 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
1 DEMOGRAPHY:
Population thous.psn 19,102 20,476 20,675 20,869 20,328 20,483 20,675
Population growth % 1.4 1.1 1 1 0.9 0.8 0.9
Labour force (LF) thous.psn 6,827 8,074 8,108 8,555 8,454 8,802 8,805
LF participation rate % 50.3 48.7 48.1 47.8 52.6 53.8 53.3
Unemployment rate % 7.6 5.8 4.9 4.2 4 4.4 4.3
2 OUTPUT:
GDP at current prices US$ billion 16.6 42.1 49.6 59.2 59.4 67.2 74.9
Per capita GDP at current
US$ 869 2,054 2,397 2,836 2,922 3,280 3,625
prices
GDP growth % 6 3.5 8 8.2 6.3 7.2 7.4
Agriculture % 1.8 3.2 7 1.4 5.2 4.7 0.3
Industry % 7.5 4.2 8.4 10.3 10.3 9.9 11.4
Service % 7 3.3 8 8.6 4.6 6.4 6.5
3 Aggegate demand saving
Consumption % of GDP 82.6 82.1 80.7 84.6 83.1 80 78.9
Investment % of GDP 28 24.4 27.6 29.9 30.6 29.5 29.7
Net exports % of GDP -10.6 -6.5 -8.3 -14.5 -13.7 -9.5 -8.6
Exports % of GDP 39 21.3 22.4 23.1 22.8 22.5 22.3
Imports % of GDP 49.6 27.8 30.7 37.6 36.5 32 30.9
Domestic savings % of GDP 17.4 17.9 19.3 15.4 16.9 20 21
National savings % of GDP 21.5 23.7 25.4 22.1 24 25.8 27
4 EXTERNAL TRADE:
Trade balance US$ million -1,798 -3,122 -4,825 -9,710 -9,417 -7,609 -8,287
Exports US$ million 5,522 7,085 8,626 10,559 9,774 10,394 11,130
Imports US$ million 7,320 10,207 13,451 20,269 19,190 18,003 19,417
5 PRICES:
Colombo CPI (2006/07 = percentage
3.5 6.2 6.7 7.6 6.9 3.3
100), annual average change
Wholesale Price Index (1974 percentage
1.7 4.2 11.2 10.6 3.5 9.2 3.2
= 100), annual average change
EXCHANGE RATE (ANNUAL
6
AVERAGE):
LKR to 1US$ LKR 75.78 114.94 113.06 110.57 127.6 129.11 130.56
Source: Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2015, “Annual Report-2014”
11
2.3.3 Penetration of Japanese-affiliated Companies into the Country

According to a survey conducted by JETRO in November 2014, the number of
Japanese-affiliated companies operating in Sri Lanka was 118 and 64 of them were registered
members of the Japan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (JCCI).
Among the 64 members of the JCCI, 24 were manufacturing companies, 20 were construction
companies and the rest were trading and service entities.
Table 2-6: List of Japanese-affiliated Companies Operating in Sri Lanka

Types Name of the companies
Colombo Dock Yard D&O International Jagreen
Lanka Ecom Lanka Naigai MASPRO Lanka
MIC Lanka Mogami Steel Tech Metatechno Lanka
Manufacturing Tokyo Cement Tropical Funding Okaya Lanka
(24 companies) Colombo Power FDK Lanka Sato Chemifa Lanka
Lanka Harness Lanka Pr. Wakaki Lanka
MIRRAI Noritake Lanka YKK Lanka
TOS Lanka Usui Lanka Inoac Polymer Lanka
Daiho Corporation Daimei SLK DPM Consulting
Kumagai Gumi Kurimoto Maeda Corporation
Penta-Ocean Construction Sanken Construction Shin Nippon Lanka

Construction
(20 companies) J-Power Kinden Taisei Corporation
Nippon Koei NJS Consultants TOA Corporation
WKK Lanka (World Kaihatsu
Kitano Lanka Wakachiku Construction
Kogyo)
Oriental Consultants Katahira & Engineers
ITOCHU Corporation Mitsubishi Corporation Mitsui & Co
NHS International Bansei Royal Resorts Rohto Pharmaceutical Co
Nihon Bashi Jalanka International World Lanka Tours
Trading and Lanka Top (Ginza Hosen) Shanthi Lanka Srieko Holidays
Service
(20 companies) Yusen Logistics & Kusuhara
New World Securities IDEAL Finance
Lanka
Kaihatsu Management Expolanka International Toyota Tsusho
Toyota Lanka Tozai Boeki Kaisha
Source: JETRO, 2014, “Business Environment in Sri Lanka”
In October 2013, JETRO implemented a survey targeting the above companies in order to
identify business needs of the companies operating in Sri Lanka. The survey revealed the
following breakdown for number of years Japanese-affiliated companies have worked in Sri
Lanka: about 40% had worked in Sri Lanka for more than 20 years while 26% for 10 to 20 years
and 35% for less than 10 years in the country. This implicates that the penetration of Japanese
companies into the country increased after 1995 (Figure 2-1).
12
7% 1-10 years
14% 35% 11-20 years
21-30 years
18%
31-40 years
26% 41-50 years
Figure 2-1: Share of Companies by Operated Years in Sri Lanka

According to the results of the survey, the majority of the companies started working in Sri
Lanka because of the following reasons:
 Cheap labour
 Expected potential of economic growth
 Implementation of ODA projects
 Connections in Sri Lanka and
 Improvements in public safety.
At the same time, the companies indicated the following items as merits of investing in Sri
Lanka:
 Stable political and social conditions
 Expected potential for economic growth
 High quality of human resources and
 Geographical advantage
In addition to the above advantages, there are possibilities that Sri Lanka will function as a
gateway to India for Japanese companies and provide them with opportunities of
tourism-oriented businesses and penetration to new markets. Therefore, it is expected that
penetration of Japanese Companies into the country will increase in the future.
2.4 Administrative Division

For administrative purposes, Sri Lanka is divided into nine provinces and twenty-five districts.
There is a parallel mechanism of administrative divisions; one of them is a central government
line which is a division under the Ministry of Public Administration and Home Affairs
(MoPAHA) and the other is Local Authority (LA) under each Provincial Council (PC). The
former has taken over the governance mechanism of the colonial era; the PC was introduced in
1987 with the aim of resolving the post-civil war.
2.4.1 District and Division
Sri Lanka is divided into 25 districts. Each district is administered under a District Secretariat
and the District Secretary who is appointed by the central government governs the District. The
main tasks of the District Secretariat involve coordinating communications and activities
between the central government and the Divisional Secretariats which is affiliated with the
District Secretariats. The District Secretariat is also responsible for implementing and
monitoring development projects at the district level and assisting lower-level subdivisions in
their activities, as well as revenue collection and coordination of elections in the district. A
district is divided into 256 Divisional Secretary's Divisions (commonly known as DS divisions),
13
which are in turn subdivided into Grama Niladhari (GN) Divisions.

2.4.2 Province and Local Authority
There have been provinces in Sri Lanka since the 19th century, but they had no legal status until
1987 when the 13th Amendment to the 1978 constitution established provincial councils after
several decades of increasing demand for a decentralization of the Government of Sri Lanka.
Although each PC receives administrative support and budget allocation from the Ministry of
Local Government and Provincial Councils (MoLGPC), it is an autonomous body not under the
authority of any Ministry. Some of its functions have been undertaken by central government
ministries, but authority over land and police is not as a rule given to PCs. Prior to 1987, all
administrative tasks for the provinces were handled by a district-based civil service which had
been in place since colonial times. Now each province is administered by a directly elected PC.
The PC has been given the oversight responsibility for operation and management of LAs; it
also has a right to dissolve the LA. There is an administrative officer called the Provincial
Commissioner of Local Government (CLG) who is in charge of the LAs in the PC and also the
Assistant Commissioner of Local Government (ACLG) who is in charge of the LA of each
district.
The LAs are divided into three types according to its population and size: Municipal Councils
(MC, 23) which corresponds to the city, Urban Councils (UC, 41) which corresponds to the
town, and Pradeshiya Sabha (PS, 271) which corresponds to the village. They are responsible
for providing a variety of local public services including roads, sanitation, drains, waste
collection, housing, libraries, public parks and recreational facilities. The following shows the
distribution of LAs by province and a diagram of government agency relationship in Sri Lanka.
Table 2-7: Distribution of LAs by Province1
Province MC UC PS Total
Central 4 6 33 43
Eastern 3 5 37 45
North Central 1 0 25 26
North Western 1 3 29 33
Northern 1 5 28 34
Sabaragamuwa 1 3 25 29
Southern 3 4 42 49
Uva 2 1 25 28
Western 7 14 27 48
Total 23 41 271 335
1
Finance Commission of Sri Lanka Annual Report 2013
14
Figure 2-2: Diagram of Government Agency Relationship in Sri Lanka2
2.5 Institutional System According to the Waste Management
2.5.1 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions
a. Central Government Agencies

Central government agencies that are related to laws and administrations of waste management
are the Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Councils (MoLGPC) responsible for the
local government, the Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment (MoMDE) which
are leading administrative guidance from the perspective of environmental protection, the
Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development (MoMWD）responsible for planning for the
megapolis development, and the Ministry of Health, Nutrition and Indigenous Medicine (MoH)
which are leading administrative guidance from the perspective of health and sanitation. In
addition, National Solid Waste Management Support Center (NSWMSC) and the Central
Environmental Authority (CEA) are affiliated respectively to the MoLGPC and MoMDE. An
overview of the role and jurisdiction of each agency is shown below.
2
Excerpted from the Preliminary Survey Report of Capacity Upgrading Project for National Solid Waste Management Support
Centre in Sri Lanka (2007)
15
Related Agencies Role and Jurisdiction

Ministry of Local They are responsible for the implementation of policies and plans for
Government and Local Authorities (LA) through the nine Provincial Councils (PC). They
Provincial Councils are mainly responsible for the coordination between the central
(MoLGPC) government and PCs, supporting the formulation and implementation of
national policy related to PCs and LAs, financial and technical assistance,
and assistance for human resources development and research for good
governance.
In this Ministry, there are other institutions such as the Local Loan and
Development Fund (LLDF) responsible for funding for LAs and the Sri
Lankan Institute of Local Governance (SLILG) responsible for
administrative capacity building and research for LAs.
Ministry of Mahaweli They formulate a national policy in relation to waste management. In
Development and 1998, they have prepared a municipal waste database in Sri Lanka and
Environment made a revision in 2005. While preparing the database, they make use of
(MoMDE) LAs in waste generation amount surveys and waste composition surveys
so that the LAs can understand the importance of recycling, proper waste
collection, intermediate treatment, and final disposal.
Ministry of The MoMWD is a new ministry appointed by the Cabinet of Sri Lanka
Megapolis and after August 2015 elections. The ministry is in charge of discovering
Western solutions to resolve the garbage, housing of shanty dwellers issues as well
Development as drawing new traffic plans to avoid traffic jams in busy towns.
(MoMWD) Regarding SWM, since each LA is responsible for managing the regional
activities by legislations, the ministry is not directly involved but
responsible for assisting LAs with improvement of SWM. On the other
hand, since there are a lot of projects related to SWM being carried out by
individual ministries and organizations, there was a need for a mechanism
for overall management of these activities. Therefore, the ministry as a
decision-making organization in accordance with SWM established the
Committee of Secretaries, which consists of the top of the following
secretaries. They shall collectively manage the activities of the individual
institutions that are working individually and all of the SWM projects
must be approved by them.
 MoMWD
 MoLGPC
 Ministry of Water Supply and City Planning
 Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation
（SLLRDC）
 Provincial Council of Western Province (Chief Secretary of the
province)
 MoMDE
Currently only the Western Province becomes one of the members of the
committee but in the future, all of the provinces are planned to join. 3
Ministry of Health, They have jurisdiction over the policy-making, monitoring and
Nutrition and management of medical waste and they prepared the Healthcare Waste
Indigenous Medicine Management National Policy to encourage proper disposal of medical
(MoH) waste.
They dispatch the Public Health Inspector (PHI) to all the cities and towns
and some of the villages and allocate a post called Chief PHI (CPHI) to a
senior PHI who is in charge of supervision and management of PHIs.
The Divisional Secretary's Division has jurisdiction over the Medical
Officer of Health (MOH), and they are working together with the PHI to
3
Based on the results of the interview with the additional secretary of MoMWD on January 19, 2016.
16

improve and preserve the health and hygiene of the region.
National Solid Waste The NSWMSC was established by the MoLGPC in 2007, was
Management Support recommended by “the JICA Study on Improvement of Solid Waste
Center (NSWMSC) Management in Secondary Cities (2002-2003)” in order to assist LAs to
improve the solid waste management problem. The staffs consist of 15
officers (1 Director, 3 Assistant Directors, 10 Development Officers, and 1
Management Assistant) in total4.
Their main duties are as follows:
 To provide a variety of manuals and guidelines to facilitate LAs to
implement proper SWM.
 To provide a variety of technical assistance on solid waste
management to LAs.
 To collect and study information on the current SWM practices and
the practices in LAs, as well as those in foreign countries. The
NSWMSC then provides this useful information to LAs.
 To facilitate LAs to get technical and financial assistance from NGOs
and donors
 To promote, evaluate, and make recommendations to the National
Strategy for Solid Waste Management.
 To collect and analyse the waste management data of LAs.
The organizational chart of the NSWMSC is shown in the following
Figure2-2.
Central The CEA is one of the main implementing arms of the National
Environmental Environmental Act (NEA) under the MoMDE and is responsible for the
Authority (CEA) supervision and management of solid waste. They consist of six major
divisions such as the Human Resource Development, the Administration
& Finance Division, the Environmental Pollution Control (EPC) Division,
the Environmental Management and Assessment (EM&A) Division, the
Environmental Education and Awareness (EE&A) Division, the Project
Division and the Provincial Networking Division. The Environmental
Assessment Unit under the Environmental Management and Assessment
Division is responsible for implementing the Environmental Impact
Assessment process according to the NEA. The Environmental Pollution
Control Division is engaged in regulatory activities associated with the
contamination of air, water, soil and industrial pollutions. These functions
are performed by the following four units: Pollution Control Unit, Waste
Management Unit, Laboratory Services Unit and Monitoring Unit.
The Waste Management Unit is in charge of the Scheduled Waste
Management. The Project Division consists of the following four units:
the Pilisaru Waste Management Project Unit, the Waste Disposal
Facility Construction Unit, the National Post Consumer Plastic Waste
Management Project (NPCPWMP) Unit and the Sanitary Landfill Site
Unit5The organizational chart of the CEA is shown in Figure2-3.
4
Based on the results of the interview on August 25, 2015
5
Based on the results of the interview on August 31, 2015
17
Figure 2-3: Organizational Chart of the NSWMSC6
Figure 2-4: Organizational Chart of the CEA7
6
NSWMSC website (http://www.lgpc.gov.lk/eng/?page_id=1118)
7
CEA Annual Report 2012
18
b. Local Government Agencies

At the local level, as supervision rights over LAs was handed over from central government to
the PCs through the 13th Amendment of the 1987 constitution, the rights relating to waste
management were accordingly handed over to the PC. Also LAs are responsible for collection
and disposal of waste generated by residents who live in the region.
Only in the Western Province, the Waste Management Authority (WMA), founded under the
Western Provincial Council, is in charge of the cluster waste management system. An overview
of the role and jurisdiction of each agency is shown below.
Provincial There are nine PCs across the country. They provide substantial
Council (PC) administrative guidance to the District and LAs of the region. Their duty is
to provide administrative services for the basic daily life of citizens and
community such as waste management. Regarding financial assistance for
waste management in LAs, LAs have to submit the application of costs –
excluding small amounts (5,000-15,000Rs.) – including costs associated
with the placement of staff to the PC. It is necessary to get approval from
the PC.
The PC has engineers in the Local Government Department in the PC,
therefore they dispatch engineers in cases where the LA does not have
engineer(s) but needs technical support or guidance for waste disposal, or
there is a request from LAs. If a ministry asks LAs for some request(s) or
guidance, it has to be done through the PC.
Local Authority LAs, under the supervision of the PCs, are responsible for providing
(LA) administrative services in accordance with the regional environment such
as health and hygiene, waste disposal, regional environmental protection,
and park management. Although they are able to formulate the laws
through parliament and to give instructions to the regional police, it is said
that the legislative system of local government is not fully functional.
The CPHI (Chief PHI) or the Public Health Department in LAs that is
directed by the PHl conduct actual operations and management of
municipal waste. The(C) PHl conducts not only collection, transportation,
and disposal of waste but also supervises the health management of waste
collection workers and gives guidance and training on waste collection
(e.g. health management guidance such as wearing gloves). In addition,
they are in charge of recording the attendance of waste collection workers
and their allocation for collection area(s), and receiving complaints from
residents.
2.5.2 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions in Western Province

Western Province consists of three districts; Gampaha, Colombo, and Kalutara and there are 48
LAs within the region. There are 13 LAs in the Colombo District that has the most serious
SWM problems among all districts and they share three disposal sites (Karadiyana,
Meethotamulla, and Kaduwela). In the Western Province, the Waste Management Authority
(WMA) is responsible for supporting LAs to improve their SWM. An overview of the role and
jurisdiction of each agency is shown below.
19

Western Provincial The WPC provides substantial administrative guidance to the District and LAs
Council (WPC) of the Western Province; however SWM is delegated to the Waste
Management Authority (WMA), which was established under the WPC. All of
LAs in the Western Province are supposed to manage their wastes in
accordance with the MSW Management Rule No.1 (2008) formulated by the
WPC.
The Department of Local Government (DLG) under the WPC is responsible for
coordination between LA and the central government / WPC in the Western
Province, for monitoring the financial status of each LA and also for allocation
of subsidies from the central government and WPC to each LA taking into
account the sector-specific maximum expenditure (Ceiling) defined by Finance
Commission and the priority of expenditures.
The head of the DLG is appointed as the Commissioner of Local Government
(CLG), under which there are three Assistant Commissioners in charge of each
district in the Western Province.
Waste Management WMA, established in 2004 under Waste Management Statute No.9 of the
Authority of Western Western Provincial Council in 1999 is responsible for supervision of waste
Province (WMA) management of the entire WP. The WMA Statute No.1 was formulated in 2007
and it specifies jurisdiction, function and responsibility of the WMA.
According to the statute, WMA is responsible for providing technical and
financial assistances to all Las of the WP to build their capacities in SWM,
collecting waste data in WP, developing common final disposal sites to LAs
and also assisting to LAs to inculcate waste management discipline among the
public (through public awareness activity and environmental education etc. ).
WMA formulated the five-year Action Plan for 2015 - 2020, the targets such as
improving the collection rate up to 72% by 2020 from 61% in 2015, the
recycling rate (based on waste generation amount) up to 38% by 2020 from
17% in 2015, the recovery rate by compost and incineration up to 71% by 2020
from 13% in 2015 have been set. Seven LAs (Moratuwa MC,
Boralesgamuwa UC, Kesbewa UC, Dehiwala Mount Lavinia MC, Sri
Jayewardenapura Kotte MC, Maharagama UC, Homagama PS) out of thirteen
LAs in the Colombo District are using Karadiyana cluster disposal sites, and
WMA is in charge of its operation and maintenance, including the collection of
tipping fees. Currently in this disposal site, the Waste Management Plaza has
been planned and under construction including such facilities as a sorting yard,
bio-methanization, Waste to Energy in addition to the existing composting
facility8. WMA consists of five working divisions including Technical Section,
Financial Section, Administrative Section, Legal Section and Media Section.
The organizational chart of the WMA is shown in the following Figure2-5.
Colombo Municipal WMA is in charge of macro management and planning of SW of entire
Council (CMC） Western Province. However, CMC is in charge of operation and management
of Meethothamulla disposal site which is shared with Kolonnawa UC.
Waste collection in CMC is conducted using 90 units of vehicles including 63
compactor trucks which were provided by JICA in the 1990s and collection
area is divided into six Districts. Waste collection, street cleaning and waste
transportation in the CMC are conducted by the outsourced two private
companies (Carekleen and Abans) according to the waste management
guidelines formulated by the CMC. The collection coverage are is
approximately 100%.
8
Based on the results of the JICA data collection survey
8
WMA Our Plans for the Future Period Goals Objectives Strategies &Act
20
Figure 2-5: Organizational Chart of the WMA9
ion Plans
9
WMA Our Plans for the Future Period Goals Objectives Strategies &Act
21
3 Current Status and Issues of the Solid Waste Management

Sector
3.1 National Level Plan and Strategy
In Sri Lanka, the National Strategy for Solid Waste Management (NSSWM) has been
formulated in 2000. It stipulates solid waste management to be conducted as follows:
 Prioritize waste avoidance and reduction over the next stage of waste recycling and
other forms of environmentally sound disposal
 Reuse unavoidable waste as much as possible
 Maintain the content of hazardous substances in waste at the lowest possible level
and
 Guarantee an environmentally sound residual waste treatment and disposal as basic
prerequisites for human existence.
In 2007, the National Policy on Solid Waste Management10 was formulated. It defines the
environmental accountability and social responsibility of all waste generators, waste managers
and service providers and aims to actively involve individuals and all institutions in integrated
and environmentally sound solid waste management practices.
Consequently, the CEA initiated the “Pilisaru” National Solid Waste Management Program in
2008 and donated a grant totalling about 5.6 billion rupees (about 4.6 billion yen) to the local
governments that implement solid waste management activities.
On the other hand, the Sri Lanka Government prioritizes appropriate and sustainable SWM, a
Ten-year Horizon Development Framework (2006-2016)" and identifies the importance of the
promotion of the 3Rs and the establishment of an environmentally friendly final disposal site for
sustainable SWM system. The government is preparing the investment plan. In 2009, they also
formulated the "National Action Plan for the Haritha Lanka Programme (2009 ~ 2016)" with the
aim of sustainable development, in which they identify SWM as one of the priority issues and
set a strategy for adopting appropriate infrastructure and/or alternative methods necessary for
SWM in each LA. The national level plans and policies/strategies in Sri Lanka are summarized
in the following table.
Table 3-1: Plans and Policies/Strategies related to SWM
Year Policy & Regulation Description
2000 National Strategy for Solid Waste  3-years action plan, Waste reduction, 3R implementation
Management (NSSWM)
2003 Caring for Environment  Funded by United Nations Developing Program; UNDP
Phase I (2003-2007)  National Environmental Action Plans
Phase II (2008-2012)
2005 Vision for A New Sri Lanka  A Ten Year Horizon Development Framework 2006-2016 formulated by
Ministry of Finance and Planning
 Solid waste and pollution management included in the investment plan
2007 National Policy on Solid Waste  Waste reduction, 3R implementation, Sanitary landfills
Management  Capacity building, Research and development (Best Available Technologies
(BAT), Best Environmental Practices (BEP)
2008 Pilisaru Programme  National level programme for solid waste management under the chairmanship
Phase I(Jan. 200 –Dec. 2013) of Ministry of Environment, CEA, and others.
Phase II(Jan. 2014–Dec. 2018)  Initial budget amount: 5.675 bil LKR.
 Target is to introduce small and medium waste treatment system in all local
government authorities by year 2018 and to cover 50% by year 2016.
2009 National Action Plan for Haritha  Establishment of National Council for Sustainable Development (NCSD)
Lanka Programme  Sustainable development: Harita (Green) Lanka Programme
22
3.2 Laws and Regulations related to Waste
3.2.1 Waste Management
a. Legal Framework
In Sri Lanka, LAs are responsible for collection and disposal of waste generated by residents
who live in the region, which is stipulated in the Municipal Councils Ordinances No.16, Urban
Council Ordinance No.61, and Pradeshiya Sabha Act No. 15. Each LA has been given the
authority to define the implementation rules necessary for the waste management and regulation
and to impose penalties.
At the provincial level, as supervision right over LAs was handed over from the central
government to the PCs through the 13th Amendment of the 1987 constitution, its rights relating
to waste management were accordingly handed over to the PC in the Provincial Council Act No.
42.
In 1980, the MoMDE formulated the National Environmental Act (NEA) No.47 aiming to
preserve the environment, to maintain environmental quality and to prevent pollution.
Consequently, the CEA has been established and their jurisdictions, functions, and
responsibilities are defined in the NEA. Furthermore, the Amendment to the NEA in 1993
requires an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the establishment of such facilities as
intermediate treatment and final disposal site(s) with a capacity exceeding 100 ton/day. The
legal frameworks related to SWM are summarized in the following table.
Table 3-2: Legal Frameworks Related to SWM
Year Policy & Regulation Description
1939 Urban Council Ordinance No. 61  Sections 118, 119, and 120
of 1939  Specify waste management responsibilities of UCs
1946 Nuisance Ordinance No. 62 of  Section 1-12
1939 and No. 57 of 1946
1947 Municipal Councils Ordinances  Sections 129, 130, and 131 in 1980
No. 16 of 1947  Legal and regulatory framework for waste management at the MC level
1979 Code of Criminal Procedure Act  Section 98
No. 15 of 1979 – Public Nuisances
1987 Provincial Councils Act No.42 of  Amended by Act No.56 of 1988
1987  LAs contain provisions for waste management
1987 Pradeshiya Sabha Act No.15 of  Sections 93 and 94
1987  Specify waste management responsibilities of PSs
1980 National Environmental Act No.47  Section 12 and 26
of 1980  Establishment of CEA
 Amended by Act No.56 of 1988 (Introduction of EPL, IEE, EIA)
 Amended by Act No. 53 of 2000, Gazette Extra ordinary No.1466/5 of 2006
2007 Prevention of Mosquitoes  Prohibition against creating conditions favourable to the breeding of mosquitoes.
Breeding Act No.11 of 2007
2008 National Thoroughfares  Section 64 (a), (b), (c ) and Section 65
Act No. 40 of 2008
2009 Gazette No. 1627/19 National  General Rules on SWM discharge and collection of waste(Prohibition of waste
Environmental (Municipal dumping at national highway and at any place other than places designated for
Solid Waste) Regulations, No. 1 of such purpose by the LA
2009.
b. Environmental Standards
The wastewater discharge standards are stipulated under the NEA according to the type of
industries and discharge methods. According to the list of “The prescribed activities for which a
license is required” (NEA No. 47, 1980 Section 23A amended by Act No. 1533/16 2008, CEA),
Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTPs) as well as hospitals and factories using hazardous
substances are required to register on an annual basis. Amendments are also being proposed to
23
the NEA to overcome delays in enforcement actions. No amendment components address

“wastewater” of any kind at present.
National Environmental (protection and quality) Regulation (EPL) -1990. Gazette Notification
Number 595/16 in 1990 and its amendment of Gazette Notification Number 1534/18 in 2008
provide the “General Standards for discharge effluents into inland surface waters”. The EPL is
applied for the following projects related to SWM11;
 Common wastewater (industrial or sewage) treatment plants

 Incinerators with a feeding capacity of five or more metric tons per day.
 Water treatment plants with a treatment capacity of 10,000 or more cubic meters per day.
 Municipal solid waste and other solid waste composting plants with a capacity of 10 or
more metric tons per day.
 Solid waste recovery/recycling or processing plants with a capacity of 10 or more metric
tons per day.
 Solid waste disposal facility with a disposal capacity of 10 or more metric tons per day.
 All toxic and hazardous waste treatment facilities or disposal facilities or
recycling/recovering or storage facilities.
 The defined project for the SWML is Industries /facilities that generate scheduled waste.
The Scheduled Waste Management License (SWML) is stipulated in the in the Gazette Extra
ordinary No. 924/13 of 1996, No. 1159/22 of 2000, and No. 1533/16 of 2008. There is no penal
clause for non-compliance although legal action is always necessary against the violation of the
regulations.
The standards concerning water reuse are published by the Sri Lanka Standards Institute but
currently there are no governmental requirements for the usage of sludge. The Sri Lanka
Standard for Compost from Municipal Solid Waste and Agricultural Waste - SLSI 1246 was
published in 2003. However, the “Sri Lanka Standard Specification for Organic Fertilizers” is
still in the draft format. Moreover, the code of practice for design and construction of Bio Gas
System for domestic (household) use was published as SLS 1292 – Part 1 in 2006. The
publication of Part 2 covering the farm scale system with capacity ranging from 10-100m3 is
still in progress12. The environmental standards related to SWM in Sri Lanka are summarized in
the following table.
11
Based on the results of the JICA data collection survey
11
WMA Our Plans for the Future Period Goals Objectives Strategies &Action Plans
11
WMA Our Plans for the Future Period Goals Objectives Strategies &Action Plans
11
Naofumi Sato, Ken Kawamoto and Mangalika Lokuliyanaga “Current condition and issues of municipal solid waste management
in Sri Lanka” (2014)
12
JST-JICA SATREPS Project: Environment Business Survey in Sri Lanka (May, 2014)
24
Table 3-3: Environmental Standards Related to SWM

Year Pollution control regulation Descriptions
1983 SLS 614 of 1983 – Part 1  Sri Lanka standards specifications for potable water
 Prescribes the physical and chemical requirements, and methods of sampling
and test for drinking water.
1983 SLS 614 of 1983 – Part 2  Sri Lanka standards specifications for potable water
 Prescribes the bacteriological requirements and the methods of sampling and
test for drinking water.
1984 SLS 652 of 1984  Tolerance limits for industrial effluents discharged into inland surface waters
1984 SLS 722 of 1984/1985  Tolerance limits for inland surface waters for use as raw water for public water
/1985 supply
1990 Gazette Extraordinary No. 595/16 of  National Environmental Protection and Quality Regulations
1990  Specify content and specifications of EPL, the tolerance limits for wastewater
discharge from major industries and activities
 Amended by Gazette Extra ordinary No. 924/13 of 1996, No. 1159/22 of 2000,
No. 1533/16 of 2008
 Scheduled waste management license (SWML)
1993 Gazette Extraordinary No. 772/22 of  National Environmental (Procedure for approval projects) Regulations
1993  Specify project approval agencies, projects for IEE/EIA approvals
 Amended by Gazette Extra ordinary No.859/14 of 1995 and No. 1104/22 of
1999
1994 Gazette Extraordinary No. 850/4 of  National Environmental Regulations on Ambient Air Quality
1994  Amended by Gazette Extra ordinary No. 156/22 of 2008
1996 Gazette Extraordinary No. 924/12 of  National Environmental Noise Control Regulations
1996
2000 Gazette Extraordinary No. 1137/35  National Environmental Regulations for Mobile Air Quality (Air Emission,
of 2003 Fuel and Vehicle Importation Standards)
2003 SLSI1246 of 2003  Sri Lanka Standard for Compost from Municipal Solid Waste and Agricultural
Waste
2006 SLS 1292 of 2006  Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Biogas Systems – Part 1
Domestic Biogas Systems
2006 Gazette Extraordinary No. 1466/5 of  Regulation on Prohibition of Manufacture of Polythene or Any Product of 20
2006 micron or below thickness
2008 Gazette Extraordinary No. 1534/18  National Environmental Protection and Quality Regulations
of 2008  Management of scheduled waste
c. Guidelines
Guidelines related to SWM have been developed by several relevant ministries. Among them,
the guidelines developed by the CEA are to provide guidelines on the basic waste treatment
technology at the national level. But the CEA hopes that the local governments will be able to
review them and develop more stringent guidelines by themselves in the future. The guidelines
related to SWM in Sri Lanka are summarized in the following table.
Table 3-4: Guidelines Related to SWM
Year Guideline Relevant authority Descriptions
2001 Healthcare Waste Management Ministry of Health, & To provide evidence based recommendation to
Guideline Indigenous Medicine clinicians to manage hospital generated waste with
minimum harm to the environment.
2003 Solid Waste Management Ministry of Home Affairs, To support the SWM practice for LAs
Guideline for Local Authorities Provincial Councils and Local
Government
2005 Technical Guidelines on Central Environmental To support the SWM and sitting of engineered
Municipal Solid Waste Authority (CEA) landfills
Management in Sri Lanka
2007 Technical Guidelines on Solid Central Environmental To support the SWM and sitting of engineered
Waste Management in Sri Lanka Authority (CEA) landfills13
2009 Guidelines for the Management Central Environmental To manage the scheduled waste management
of Scheduled Waste in Sri Lanka Authority (CEA)
13
Regarding the final disposal, there is a regulation on open dumping by law but there are only two sanitary landfill sites (the Moon
Plains Landfill Site in Nuwara Eliya, Maligawatte Landfill Site in Dompe) and it is difficult for small LAs with less than 10 ton/day
of waste generation amount to construct a final disposal site taking into consideration their financial capacity. Therefore, the
guideline has flexibility and does not require the installation of leachate treatment facility.
25
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
a. The law and guideline related to EIA

The EIA in Sri Lanka was introduced in the Coastal Conservation Act No.57/1981, but the EIAs
for projects was only implemented in coastal areas. On the other hand, the National
Environmental Act (NEA), enacted in 1980 and amended in 1988, included legislation related to
the EIA. The NEA made implementation of an EIA mandatory. In the NEA, the Project
Approving Agency (PAA) is responsible for the approval of the EIA. The organization
designated as the PAA is to be that which is most relevant depending on the project
characteristics such as its size, ecosystem and whether the area is inhabited by rare species and
so on. It is also stipulated that the project owner, including the Central Environmental Authority
(CEA), cannot be the PAA. Four related gazettes are listed below.
・No. 772/22 (24th of June, 1993)
・No. 859/14 (23rd of February, 1995)
・No. 1104/22 (5th of November, 1999)
・No. 1108/1 (29th of November, 1999)
Outline the type of projects that must conduct an environmental impact assessment (prescribed
projects). Prescribed projects are those that have a seriously a negative impact on the
environment and/or those that will be implemented in an environmentally sensitive area. The
EIA is mandated in the National Heritage and Wilderness Act in 1988, the North Western
Provincial Council Environmental Statute in 1990 and the Fauna and Flora Protection
Ordinance in 1993.
Table 3-5: Act, Statute and Ordinance list which mandate EIA
Enacted/amended Project Approving
Name Targeted Area
year Agency
Coastal Conservation Coast Conservation
Coastal Area 1981
Act Department (CCD)
Central Environmental
National The area provided in Part Authority and related
1988
Environmental Act IV C authorities and
departments
National Heritage and Department of Wildlife
Nature and wilderness area 1988
Wilderness Act Conservation
Provincial
North Western
Environmental
Provincial Council Northwestern province 1990
Authority of the North
Environmental Statute
Western Province
Fauna and Flora Within 1 mile form Department of Wildlife
1993
Protection Ordinance National Protection area Conservation
Reference: Profile on Environmental and Social Considerations in Sri Lanka (JICA, 2012)
Guidance for Implementing the Environmental Impact Assessment Process was prepared in
1993 by the CEA to enhance implementation of the EIA procedure by the PAA and the latest
version was made in 2006.
b. The contents of EIA procedure

The NEA divides the EIA procedure into two steps according to the project scale and extent and
26
level of negative impact of the project. The details are as follows.

b.1 Initial Environmental Examination (IEE)
The Implementation of the IEE shall be mandatory when the PAA deems that the project doesn’t
have a severe environmental impact. The IEE report shall normally be composed within 10
pages and it should be conducted based on a brief survey of relevant documents and data. The
composition of the IEE report is as follows:
1. Executive summary
2. Objective, necessity and statutory requirement for the project
3. General and current environment
4. Environmental impact
5. Mitigation measures and environmental monitoring plan
6. Appendix
b.2 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
The Implementation of the EIA shall be mandated when the PAA deems that the project has a
severe environmental impact. The EIA report shall include not only the general survey,
assessment and evaluation but also the Cost Benefit analyses. Generally, the projects targeted
for the EIA in Sri Lanka are large scale developments for water resources, construction of roads
and pipelines including environmental protection areas. The composition of the EIA report is as
follows:
1. Executive summary
2. Objective, necessity and statutory requirement for the project
3. Outline of the project and alternative plan
4. Environmental impact
5. Mitigation measures and Cost and benefit analyses
6. Environmental monitoring planning
7. Appendix
c. EIA procedure
1. The Project Proponent (PP) supplies preliminary information to the PAA.
2. The PAA implements scoping (environmental assessment) considering the
environmental impact and then, along with related organizations, asks the PP questions
regarding the project. The PAA then carries out the implementation decision of the
EIA or IEE, taking the results of questions into account, and then it finalizes the TOR
for the project.
3. The PP prepares the IEE/EIA report in three languages; English, Sinhala and Tamil.
After it is submitted to the PAA, the PAA publishes the IEE/EIA report in the
aforementioned three languages in the newspaper.
4. The PAA and the CEA review the IEE/EIA report and then the PAA notifies the PP of
their questionnaire for the project. Their questionnaire and opinion can be looked
through (reviewed) for 30 working days. If there is an argument between residents, the
PAA and CEA have to hold a public hearing.
5. The PAA can require the PP to provide clear and detailed answers depending on the
residential review.
6. The PAA can determine if a project gets passed or rejected with the CEA’s approval. In
case it passes, the project shall be within acceptable environmental impact levels.
7. In case it is rejected, a petition by the PP shall be permitted.
27
8. In case it is passed, the PP and the PAA shall implement the monitoring for
environmental impact items.
d. Approval procedure for EIA

The flow of the EIA procedure by the PAA is as follows
Source: Road Development Authority. 2009. Environmental and Social Safeguards Manual.
Figure 3-1: The flow of EIA procedure by PAA

Review and monitoring of the development project at the coastal area by the Coast
Conservation Department shall be required under the Coastal Conservation Act. The flow of the
EIA procedure by the CCD is similar to the PAA flow.
28
Figure 3-2: The flow of EIA procedure by CCD
e. The Laws and regulations related to EIA

The Laws and regulations related to EIA are as follows
Table 3-6: The Laws and regulations related to EIA
No. Name of legislations and Policies Year
Forest Ordinance No. 16 of 1907 (as amended) and the Rules and Regulations
1 1907
underthe Ordinance
Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance No. 2 of 1937 (as amended by Act Nos. 49
2 1937
of 1993, 12 of 2005) and the Regulations under the Ordinance
3 Mines and Minerals Act 1973
4 National Water Supply and Drainage Board Law 1974
5 Coast Conservation Act 1981
6 National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency Act 1981
7 National Heritage Wilderness Act 1987
8 National Environmental Action Plan 1991
9 Clean Air 2000 Action Plan 1993
Forestry Sector Master Plan: To translate policy strategies into action (1995–
10 1995
2020)
11 National Biodiversity Conservation Action Plan 1998
12 National Industrial Pollution Management Policy 1998
13 National Strategy for Solid Waste Management 2002
Caring For The Environment 2003–2007: Path to Sustainable Development, the
14 2003
successor of NEAP 1998–2001
15 National Environment Policy 2003
16 National Forestry Policy 2005
17 Progress Report 2011 and Action Plan 2012 (regularly published) 2012
18 Biodiversity Conservation in Sri Lanka: A Framework of Action 1998
19 Forestry Sector Master Plan—to translate policy strategies into action (1995– 1995
29
No. Name of legislations and Policies Year

2020)
21 National Biosafety Policy 2005
22 National Forestry Policy 2005
23 National Policy on Elephant Conservation and Management 2006
24 National Wetland Policy and Strategy 2006
25 National Wildlife Policy 2000
National Environmental Act No. 47 of 1980 (as amended by Acts No. 56 of 1988
26 1980
and 53 of 2000) and the Regulations under the Act
Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka Act No. 23 of 1979 (as amended) and the
29 1979
Regulations under the Act
30 State Lands Ordinance No. 8 of 1947 (as amended) – Parts VI, VIII, IX 1947
32 Irrigation Ordinance No. 32 of 1946 (as amended) – Part VI 1946
33 Water Resources Board Act No. 29 of 1964 (as amended) 1964
34 Coast Conservation Act No. 57 of 1981 (as amended) 1981
35 Marine Pollution Prevention Act No. 35 of 2008 2008
36 Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Act No. 2 of 1996 (as amended) 1996
37 National Heritage Wilderness Areas Act No. 3 of 1988 1988
38 Soil Conservation Act No. 25 of 1951 (as amended) 1951
39 Plant Protection Act No. 35 of 1999 1999
40 Felling of Trees (Control) Act No. 9 of 1951 (as amended) 1951
41 Flood Protection Ordinance No. 4 of 1924 (as amended) 1924
42 Water Hyacinth Ordinance No. 4 of 1909 1909
43 Control of Pesticides Act No. 33 of 1980 (as amended) 1980
44 Atomic Energy Authority Act No. 19 of 1969 1969
45 Health Services Act No. 12 of 1952 (as amended) 1952
46 Municipal Councils Ordinance No. 29 of 1947 (as amended) 1947
47 Urban Councils Ordinance No. 61 of 1939 (as amended) 1939
48 Pradeshiya Sabha Act No. 15 of 1987 (as amended) 1987
49 Urban Development Authority Law No. 41 of 1978 (as amended) 1978
Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Development Corporation Act No. 15 of 1968
50 1968
(as amended)
51 Agrarian Development Act No. 46 of 2000 – Part II 2000
National Aquaculture Development Authority of Sri Lanka Act No. 53 of 1998 (as
52 1998
amended)
53 Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority Act No. 35 of 2007 2007
Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979 (as amended) – Section 98 and
54 1979
Section 261 of the Penal Code (as amended)
55 Nuisances Ordinance No. 15 of 1862 (as amended) 1862
56 Land Acquisition Act, No. 9 (1950/1956) 1950
57 Crown Lands Ordinance (1956/1960) 1956
58 Land Development (Amendment) Act, No. 9 1995
59 Land Development (Amendment) Act, No. 20 1996
A Reprint of the Land Development Ordinance (Chapter 464) as amended by Acts
60 1935
Nos. 60 of 1961 and 16 of 1969
61 Temple Land Compensation Ordinance Unknown
Guidance for Implementing the Environmental impact Assessment Process,
62 Central Environmental Authority, No. 1 - General Guide for Project Approving 1995
Agencies (PAA), No. 2 - General Guide for Conducting Environmental Scoping
Environmental Guidelines for Road and Rail Development in Sri Lanka, Central
63 1997
Environmental Authority
64 National Involuntary Resettlement Policy 2001
Source: Profile on Environmental and Social Considerations in Sri Lanka, July 2012, JICA
30
f. Permission and License related to Environment

The Environmental Protection License (EPL) is Sri Lanka’s major regulatory program for
control of industrial pollution stipulated in the National Environmental Act No. 47 of 1980,
which was amended by Acts No.56 of 1988 and No. 53 of 2000. Industries and activities that
have to be issued EPLs are classified under three categories: Category A, B and C. If a proposed
project falls under Category A, the project proponent requires an EPL from the CEA, while
Category C projects require EPLs from the respective local authorities. Like Category A,
Category B projects require EPLs from the CEA, but the EPLs can be processed though the
regional office of the CEA.
In Sri Lanka, solid waste is categorized into three groups mainly according to the generation
sites: Municipal solid waste, health-care waste and hazardous waste. In the actual disposal and
treatment, health-care waste is divided into either municipal solid waste (non-hazardous waste)
or hazardous waste (NSWMSC and JICA 2008).
Municipal solid waste is managed by Local Authorities (LAs). While the disposal and treatment
of hazardous waste is the responsibility of the discharger, the CEA is responsible for the
supervision of hazardous waste management. As for municipal solid waste (non-hazardous
waste), the CEA asks LAs for site clearance of municipal solid waste facilities, including
landfills. A facility that receives over 100 tons/day has to perform an EIA and receives approval
while one that receives less than 100 tons/day needs only an environmental recommendation
from the CEA (NSWMSC and JICA 2008). In addition to an EIA, a facility that receives over
10 tons/day has to obtain an EPL.
3.3 Current Situation of Waste Management Sector
3.3.1 Collection and Disposal Amounts of General Waste
The waste generation amount in Sri Lanka has increased from around 6,400 ton/day in 1999
(UNEP, 2001) to 10,786 ton/day since 2009 (University of Moratuwa and NSWMSC, 2013)
due to the economic growth after the end of the civil war.
Among the nine provinces, the generation amount of the Western Province is the largest,
accounting for 33% of the total generation amount of the country while that of the Uva Province
occupies the smallest share of generation amount (only 5%). As for amounts of collected waste,
the amount of waste collected in the Western Province is also the biggest occupying 52% in the
total collected waste of Sri Lanka and those of the Uva and the North-central provinces are the
smallest accounting for only 3%. The waste collection rate in the Western Province, which
includes the major metropolitan areas, is 51%, the highest among all the provinces. On the other
hand, the waste collection rate in the North-central province is the lowest (15%).
As some local authorities operate several disposal sites, the number of final disposal sites in the
country was 349 in 2013, exceeding the number of total local authorities (335). The total
amount of waste disposed at final disposal sites was estimated to be equal to the total collected
waste.
Among the final disposal sites of Sri Lanka, the Moon Plain Disposal Site in Nuwara Eliya was
constructed by JICA in 2003 as a controlled disposal site and the regional disposal site in the
Ampara District of the Eastern Province was constructed by UNOPS. There is also the Dompe
Disposal Site, a sanitary landfill site supported by KOICA.
Detailed information of the waste generation amounts, the collection amounts, the waste
collection rates and the number of final disposal sites of Sri Lanka are as follows.
31
Table 3-7: SWM Indicators of Sri Lanka

Generation amounts Collection amounts Collection Number of final
Provinces
(ton/day) (ton/day) rates disposal sites
1. Northern 566 5% 178 5% 31% 16
2. Eastern 785 7% 347 10% 44% 40
3. North-central 616 6% 91 3% 15% 35
4. North-western 1,134 11% 187 5% 16% 45
5. Central 1,585 15% 304 9% 19% 47
6. Sabaragamuwa 835 8% 178 5% 21% 30
7. Uva 587 6% 116 3% 20% 24
8. Western 3,502 33% 1,793 52% 51% 52
9. Southern 1,158 11% 264 8% 23% 60
Total 10,768 100% 3,458 100% 32% 349
Source: Moratuwa University and NSWMSC, 2013
3.3.2 Intermediate Treatment

In Sri Lanka, one of the major types of intermediate treatment facilities is a compost facility.
Although there were 71 compost facilities in 2010, the number increased to 112 and the total
processing capacity of the facilities reached 542 ton/day resulting from the Pilisaru project and
support by the NSWMSC.
The Western Province possesses the largest number of compost facilities (21 facilities) among
the nine provinces in Sri Lanka and the total daily processing capacity of the compost facilities
in the province is 117 ton/day. On the other hand, the Eastern Province operates three facilities
only with a total processing capacity of 11 ton/day. As the compost plant of the Karadiyana
Disposals Site in the Colombo District was not operational in 2015, it was not included in the
information.
Table 3-8: Target waste diversion through composting (MoMDE, 2015)
No of composting Target waste handling by
Province District
facilities compost plants (Ton/day)
Northern Province Jaffna 3 11
Anuradhapura 14 47
North Central Province Polonnaruwa 2 12
Sub total 15 59
Kurunegala 16 88
North Western Province Puttalam 5 30
Sub total 21 118
Kandy 4 17
Matale 4 8
Central Province
Nuwara Eliya 2 5
Sub total 10 30
Colombo 2 7
Kalutara 7 69
Western Province
Gampaha 8 41
Sub total 17 117
Hambantota 8 30
Matara 7 51
Southern Province
Galle 9 13
Sub total 24 94
Kegalle 6 34
Sabaragamuwa Province Rathnapura 2 2
Sub total 8 36
Badulla 5 52
Uva Province Monaragala 2 4
Sub total 7 56
Ampara 5 13
Eastern Province Baticaloa 1 9
Sub total 6 22
Total 112 542
32
3.3.3 Industrial Waste
a. Organizational and Legal Framework

In Sri Lanka, industrial waste was considered as hazardous waste that requires special control
and classified as “Scheduled Waste”. This type of waste is regulated by the Guidelines for the
Management of Scheduled Waste in Sri Lanka. According to this guideline, generators of
scheduled waste must obtain the Scheduled Waste Management License (SWML) in addition to
the Environmental Protection License (EPL). The EPL must be obtained every year from the
time of construction for any facility that would generate the specified type of waste.
In Sri Lanka, Holcim Geo-cycle Company, which is the only company that possesses the
scheduled waste treatment license, conducts proper treatments on scheduled waste. Companies
generating the scheduled waste must have carried out construction with qualified organizations
on collection and treatment of their scheduled waste and introduce a declaration system for
tracking and monitoring the treatments implemented on their scheduled waste.
The monitoring of scheduled waste generating companies targets only those with SWML.
b. Scheduled Waste Data Management

Companies with SWML are obliged to report to the Central Environmental Authority (CEA)
about the types and amounts of their scheduled waste. Presently, 350 entities were identified as
having obtained the SWML. Although the CEA has information about each of the entities, there
are no completely updated statistics about the scheduled waste.
The generation amount of the scheduled waste is 53,000 ton/year, according to the statistics
compiled in 2003.
3.3.4 Medical Waste
a. Organizational and Legal Framework

In Sri Lanka, the Ministry of Health (MoH) supervises medical waste. The MoH has been
promoting proper disposal of medical infectious waste to be discharged from medical
organizations in accordance with the Healthcare Waste Management National Policy (draft) and
the National Guideline of Medical Infectious Waste.
The guideline also regulates methods of e-waste and cytotoxic waste management, and color
codes for separation of medical waste. Although the Amendment to the National Environmental
Act (NEA) of 2008 indicated that all medical organizations must obtain the Environmental
Protection License (EPL) together with either the Scheduled Waste Management License
(SWML) or the Hazardous Waste Management License (HWML). There is only a limited
number of hospitals that possess both of the licenses.
As only 45 hospitals that are under supervision of the central and the provincial governments
obtained both the EPL and the SWL among the public hospitals, the Government of Sri Lanka
has been promoting other hospitals on qualification for both of the licenses under the Sri Lanka
Health Sector Development Project (II Phase) financed from a loan of the World Bank.
b. Current Conditions of Medical Waste Treatment

There are around 1,000 medical organizations nationwide. Forty of them are large-scale
hospitals. Although medical waste at the large-scale hospitals is separated in accordance with
the guidelines, treatment and disposal of medical waste have not been conducted properly.
Since a waste incinerator with a processing capacity of 7 ton/day was constructed in Moratuwa
33
in 2014 under the Grant Aid by the Government of Korea, medical waste generated at hospitals
in Kandy, Badulla, Galle and Jaffna is being disposed at this facility. The operation and
maintenance of this facility was transferred to a private company under the principle of
public-private partnership (PPP). The treatment fee (collection and transportation costs are
included) of the facility is 67 LKR/kg for general medical waste and 80 LKR/kg for hazardous
and infectious medical waste. There are also several small-scale medical organizations with
small incinerators.
In addition to the above, a project for construction of a regional medical waste treatment facility
for infectious waste of 134 hospitals has been approved and is expected to be financed with soft
loans from the Government of Australia. If the facility is constructed, medical waste from the
surrounding medical organizations will be transported to and treated at this facility.
c. Medical Waste Data Management

Although the MoH manages data of medical waste generated at around 35 major hospitals, an
integrated database of all medical waste generated in the country has not been developed as yet.
This data was created under a past donor-financed project.
3.3.5 Waste to Energy
a. Policy of Renewable Energy

The Ministry of Power and Energy has formulated the National Energy Policies and Strategies
of Sri Lanka (2008) which envisages the gradual increase of non-conventional renewable energy
resources to provide the right mix to generate electricity, as summarised in following Table.
Table 3-9: Generation mix proposed by the National Energy Policies and Strategies
(2008)
Minimum from
Conventional Maximum from
Year Coal (%) non-conventional
Hydrolytic (%) Oil (%)
renewable energy (%)
1995 94 6 - -
2000 45 54 - 1
2005 36 61 - 3
2010 42 31 20 7
2015 28 8 54 10
Source: (M/P&E, 2008).
The Government has also recognised the need to elevate biomass as both a commercial crop as
well as the third fuel option for electricity generation and accordingly declared Gliricedia
sepium as the fourth plantation crop after tea, rubber and coconut in 2005. Biofuels, as an
important constituent of transport energy, will be developed to take a 20 % share by 2020.
b. Status of Waste to Energy Projects

Although several waste to energy (WtE) projects were launched or announced previously, none
of them have been completed yet.
34
Table 3-10: Status of WtE projects in Sri Lanka

Site Execution body Detail
Karadiyana at Kesbewa Octagon The build-own-operate plant at a cost of US$248
in Western Province. Consolidated million will be using an Advanced Thermal
Berhad (Malaysian) Gasification Process capable of destroying up to
and WMA 1,000 tonnes a day of local municipal solid waste and
generate a minimum of 40MW electricity. The
launch ceremony was held in 06 October, 2011,
however, the project infrastructure has not been
developed yet.
Kerawalapitiya, Orizon Renewable Sri Lanka conducted an Environmental Impact
Muthurajawela in Energy (Pvt) Ltd, Assessment (EIA) study for 40mw mixed municipal
Western Province. solid waste to energy, project at Kerawalapitiya,
Muthurajawela. The Project would have constructed
a comprehensive and environmentally acceptable
Waste to Energy Plant in an area of 20 acres of
uninhabited land at Kerawalapitiya, Muthurajawela
to generate power from the gasification of municipal
solid waste. The EIA was completed by the end of
year 2010. This project was also not initiated.
Korathota, Kaduwela Renewgen In year 2012, the WMA and Renewgen Environment
in Western province. Environment Protection Kotte (Pvt) Ltd collaborated to implement
Protection Kotte a waste to energy project would have add 8 Mw to
(Pvt) Ltd and the national grid. This would have been implemented
WMA in Korathota, Kaduwela in the Western province. The
Company has tied up with Hitachi Zosen as its
technology partner to use this technology in the
project. However, this project was not implemented
due to various financial and socio-economic issues.
Kaburupitiya, Matara Biogreencycle Ltd. The inauguration was held for the technological
in Southern Province CEA portion of the third phase of the project under the
patronage of the Central Environment Authority
(CEA) with Biogreencycle Ltd. However, the project
was halted in mid-2015 due to insufficient fund
allocation by the Ministry of Environment through
the CEA
Jathikapola and Sri Lanka The Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority in
Narahenpita in Sustainable Energy collaboration with the Colombo Municipal Council
Colombo MC. Authority and the has implemented the first pilot scale biogas project at
Colombo Municipal Jathikapola in Narahenpita. This project is deemed to
Council generate 26,280 kWh of electricity per annum from
market waste generated in the premises
The Kandy Municipal The Kandy The Kandy Municipal Council signed an agreement
Council. Municipal Council with EcoTech Lanka Limited to establish a 10Mw
signed and EcoTech Waste to Energy facility at Gohagoda in year 2008.
Lanka Limited The first EIA was completed by 2010; however the
project is still at the site rehabilitation stage.
35
3.4 Outcome of Japanese Support for Solid Waste Management in Sri Lanka
3.4.1 Current Condition of Support by NSWMSC for Solid Waste Management of

Local Authorities
NSWMSC was established in 2007 In accordance with recommendation of “The Study on
Improvement of Solid Waste Management in Secondary Cities in Sri Lanka (2012)” by JICA.
Furthermore capacity of NSWMSC was enhanced during the “Capacity Upgrading Project for
the National Solid Waste Management Support Centre” (2007-2011) by JICA. After the JICA
Project, NSWMSC has supported to solve the issue of local authorities. The breakdown of
support activities by NSWMSC in 2012 and 2013 are shown in the following tables.
Table 3-11: The Breakdown of Support Activities by NSWMSC for Local Authorities in
2012
Support Detail Cost (LKR)
1.Continuation project 1.1 Kalpitiya PS： Construction of compost plant 10,837,413.59
1.2 Nochchiyagama PS Construction of compost plant 4,973,226.62
1.3 Kinniya PS： Construction of compost plant 9,740,304.00
1.4 Kinniya UC： Construction of compost plant 10,980,968.88
1.5 Tawalama PS： Construction of compost plant 4,567,116.51
1.6 Dibulagala PS： Expantion of compost plant 1,393,070.63
Total 42,492,100.23
2. Promotion of 3Rs 2.1 Distribution of home compost 3,791,550.00
2.2 Distribution of Waste Separation Bin 354,200.00
2.3 Weligama UC：Establishment of Plastics/ Polythene
recycling centers 5,829,692.16
Total 9,975,442.16
3 Improvement of 3.1 Rathnapuara MC：Improvement of existing final disposal site 3,272,547.50
existing final disposal site 3.2 Kuliyapitiya UC：Improvement of existing final disposal site 1,422,040.60
Total 4,694,588.10
4 Improvement of 4.1 Haldummulla PS：Improvement of existing compost plant 3,201,294.74
existing compost plant
4.2 Baddegama PS：Improvement of existing compost plant 1,069,685.86
4.3 Tangalle UC：Improvement of existing compost plant 2,926,300.77
Total 7,197,281.37
5.Construction of new 5.1Nuwaragampalatha (Central) PS 6,249,971.39
compost plant 5.2Minipe PS 4,741,180.21
5.3Mannar UC 11,034,498.04
5.4Karachchi PS 7,847,658.02
5.5Pelmadulla PS 9,485,311.63
5.6Nuwara Eliya PS 11,610,570.41
計 50,969,189.70
6. Training Programs for officers and workers on SWM 1,854,700.00
total 181,733,530.82
Source:NSWMSC Annual Report 2012
36
Table 3-12: The Breakdown of Support Activities by NSWMSC for Local Authorities in 2013
Support Detail Cost (LKR)
1.Continuation project 1.1 Kalpitiya PS： Construction of compost plant 1,959,289.26
1.2 Nochchiyagama PS: Construction of compost plant 893,652.68
1.3 Kinniya UC： Construction of compost plant 1,931,193.79
1.4 Nuwaragampalatha PS：Construction of compost plant 240,000.00
1.5 Minipe PS：Construction of compost plant 3,356,781.43
Total 8,380,917.16
2. Promotion of 3Rs 2.1 Distribution of home compost 1,395,195.00
2.2 Distribution of Waste Separation Bin 3,169,470.96
Total 4,564,665.96
3 Improvement of 3.1 Rathnapuara MC：Improvement of existing final disposal site 1,552,934.92
existing final disposal site 3.2 Kuliyapitiya UC：Improvement of existing final disposal site 112,831.50
Total 1,665,766.42
4 Improvement of 4.1 Baddegama PS:Improvement of existing compost plant 693,694.73
existing compost plant 4.2 Tangalle UC: Improvement of existing compost plant 2,038,961.56
Total 2,732,656.29
5.Construction of new 5.1 Mahiyanganaya PS 3,660,349.72
compost plant
5.2 Paranagama PS 1,634,303.05
Total 5,294,652.77
6. Distribution of Waste Separation Bin to Province 20,000,000
7. Design of sanitary landfill site at Madulla PS 40,000
8. Training Programs for officers and workers on SWM 202,621
9.All island SWM completion 2,985,375.50
10.Procuremne t of excavator 9,450,000.00
11.Others 7,232,385.09
Total 62,549,040.19
Source:NSWMSC Annual Report 2013
3.4.2 Outlook of the utilization of the guideline for planning, management, and
pollution control of waste landfills by SATREPS
a. Outline of the guideline for planning, management, and pollution control of

waste landfills by SATREPS
The objectives of the SATREPS project are to develop a pollution prevention and remediation
technology of waste disposal sites that take into account the regional characteristics in Sri Lanka
and to formulate the guideline for sustainable and applicable planning, maintenances and
operations for waste landfills in collaboration with the Ministry of Local Government and
Provincial Council and the Ministry of the Environment. In addition, strengthening research and
development capacities of the related counterpart organizations and training young engineers
and researchers of both countries through the SATREPS are also the other objectives. The
SATPREPS consists of five activities and the【Activity 5】is as follows.
【Activity 5】Finalise the guideline for sustainable and applicable planning, maintenances and
operations for waste landfills. This guideline will be effectively utilized in the field in order to
contribute to sustainable waste management.
37
The following four items are required as outcomes of【Activity 5】and they were integrated into
the guideline for planning, management and pollution prevention for waste landfills (2016
edition). The workshop has already been held to listen to the opinions of the relevant officials of
the Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Council and the Ministry of the Environment.
Outcome 1: The cases of social competence evaluation and improvement plans (action plan)
for the waste management business of local government
Outcome 2: The cases of hazard map for the appropriate site selection for landfills and the
guideline for appropriate site selection for new landfills based on the technical
approach in the Central Province and the Southern Province.
Outcome 3: Suggestion for environmental monitoring plan and methodology for existing
landfills and its surroundings and the monitoring cases.
Outcome 4: Introduction of case studies and combination examples of low-cost,

low-maintenance, low-environmental impact site-specific pollution control and
restoration techniques for waste landfill sites.
These outcomes were integrated into the guideline for planning, management and pollution
prevention for waste landfills (2016 edition), which was submitted to the Ministry of Local
Government and Provincial Council and the Ministry of the Environment and is expected to be
posted on the website of the University of Peradeniya, CEA and NSWMSC. Moreover, even
after the end of the SATREPS project, this guideline will be updated regularly by the committee
members consisting of NSWMSC, CEA and the university officials under the initiative of the
Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Council.
b. Outlook of the utilization of the guideline for planning, management, and

pollution control of waste landfills by SATREPS
The major organizations related to the SWM in Sri Lanka are the Ministry of Local Government
and Provincial Council, the Ministry of Environment, NSWMSC, CEA, provincial councils and
local governments and any of them need what is described in the guideline for planning,
management, and pollution control of waste landfills (2016 edition), therefore it is determined
to be fully utilized. In particular, the cases shown in the above mentioned outcomes from 1 to 3
seem to be possibly used immediately. However, regarding the "Outcome 4: Introduction of
case studies and combination examples of low-cost, low-maintenance, low-environmental
impact site-specific pollution control and restoration techniques for waste landfill sites”,
outdoor experimental studies are still in progress so it cannot be applied to the site immediately.
For this reason, the pollution control and restoration techniques (selection of the liner material
and the soil covering specification) should be partially used.
The table of contents of the guideline and the relevant organizations to be expected to utilize
it are shown below.
38
Table 3-13: The table of contents of the guideline and the relevant organizations to be
expected to utilize it
Table of Contents Major Organizations who Purposes of utilization
utilize it
1.Introduction －－
2. Solid Waste Management in CEA/Provincial Councils To develop legislation of SWM
Sri Lanka
NSWMSC To assist Local Governments in
formulating Action Plans
Local Governments To formulate Action Plans
3.Risk Assessment and Risk NSWMSC/CEA/ Provincial To develop legislation of SWM
Management of Waste Landfill Councils
Local Governments To formulate Action Plans
4.Environemtal Monitoring of CEA/ Local Governments To develop and implement the

Existing Waste Landfill environmental monitoring plans
5. Landfill Site Selection NSWMSC/CEA/Provincial To select suitable landfill sites based
Government/Local on the technical approach
Governments
6. Pollution Control Techniques Local Governments/ To properly plan and operate landfill
for Waste Landfill NSWMSC / CEA sites by introducing low-cost,
low-maintenance, low-environmental
impact site-specific pollution control
and restoration techniques for waste
landfill sites.
7.Conclusive Remarks and －－
Futre Prospective
3.5 The SWM Problems at the National Level

The Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) indicated the lack of sustainability in the SWM system
as a critical issue in the Ten-year National Development Plan (2006-2016). It emphasized the
importance of promotion of the 3Rs and establishment of environment-friendly disposal sites
for accomplishment of a sustainable SWM system, and prepared an investment plan.
Moreover, the GOSL prepared the National Action Plan for the Haritha Lanka Programme
(2009-2016) in 2009 aiming for sustainable development in the country. Within this programme,
SWM issues were also indicated as critical development issues and establishments or proper
replacements of SWM infrastructures in local authorities was stressed within the strategy.
However, the current waste collection rate estimated based on the generation amount has been
51% in the Western Province, the most populated province in the country, and only 32% on
average for the country (Moratuwa University and NSWMSC, 2013).
One of the reasons for the insufficient implementation of SWM improvement plans is the
insufficiency of the legal system such as a special law on waste treatment. The contents that are
required in Sri Lanka’s laws and regulations on waste treatment are as follows:
(1)Definition of waste: General waste and Industrial waste
(2)Obligations of relevant parties: Provinces, regions, local authorities, business entities
and residents
(3)Obligations related with waste treatment: Local authorities and business entities
(4)Waste treatment plan
(5)Waste treatment standards: Collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of
general and industrial waste
39
The definitions of solid waste, management policy, service, facility, recycling, regulation,
penalty and so on are mentioned in the Japanese “Waste Management and Public Cleansing
Law”. Local authorities in Japan formulate the solid waste regulation or by-law according to
above mentioned law and execute the solid waste management based on the clear legal basis.
On the other hand, there is no such higher law of solid waste management in Sri Lanka. The
local authorities cannot formulate proper regulation or by-law and it causes importer solid waste
management.
Table 3-14: Japanese Waste Management and Public Cleansing Law
CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER II MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

Section 1 Municipal Solid Waste Management
Section 2 Municipal Solid Waste Management Service
Section 3 Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Facility
Section 4 Special Provision on Recycling of Municipal solid waste
Section 5 Export of Municipal solid waste
CHAPTER III INDUSTRIAL WASTE

Section 1 Industrial Waste Management
Section 2 Information Processing Center and Industrial Waste Appropriate
Management Promotion Center
Subsection 1 Information Processing Center
Subsection 2 Industrial Waste Appropriate Management Promotion Center
Section 3 Industrial Waste Management Service
Section 4 Specially Controlled Industrial Waste Management Service
Section 5 Industrial Waste Disposal Facility
Section 6 Special Provisions Pertaining to Recycling of Industrial Waste
Section 7 Export and Import of Industrial Waste
CHAPTER III-II WASTE MANAGEMENT CENTER
CHAPTER IV MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS
CHAPTER V PENAL REGULATIONS
3.6 Other Donor’s Activities

In Sri Lanka, activities of the donors related to SWM are very dynamic. The outlines of their
activities and the lessons learned are described below.
3.6.1 United Nations Office for Project Services（UNOPS）
a. Environmental Remediation Programme (ERP)

The UNOPS implemented the Environmental Remediation Programme (ERP) with the CEA as
a counterpart in the Ampara District in the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka by using the
supporting funds for the tsunami victims. This programme was conducted in Phase 1 (2007 -
June 2011) and Phase 2 (July to June 2013, 2011) and the budgets for each phase was 10.5
million euros (14.3 million dollars) and 2.14 million euros (2.91 million US dollars)
respectively. In this programme, they conducted capacity training for waste management
officers and public awareness activities in all of the 12 municipalities including the Ampara
District and also provided seven disposal sites, five recycling centers, five compost plants, and
40
one transfer station.

A fee-based waste collection system has been established in the Eastern Province, which is now
being adopted by local authorities in other parts of the country. Also the marketing channels to
sell compost produced from collected waste have been established and over 1,700 bags of
compost are now produced each month, generating over US$ 28,000 in revenue per year.
In addition, this project has been recognized as a best practice of waste management by the
CEA. The factors for success include community awareness programmes and school recycling
projects, which were launched to encourage locals to 'reduce, reuse and recycle'. Also specific
training was provided for women to help ensure their households properly disposed of waste.
Building on the success and lessons learnt in Ampara, the UNOPS is now implementing a new
project to support local authorities in the neighbouring district of Baticaloa, with financial
support from the EU14.
As a lesson learned, in order to continue to maintain the running of constructed waste treatment
facilities, it is essential to conduct capacity building for SWM of the LA that operates the
facility and also to establish a financial system that will secure a sufficient budget for SWM.
The Sri Lankan side always has a strong demand for hard facilities. However, there is a risk that
the built facilities could be left alone without actually carrying out any operations. The
counterpart of this project was the CEA but it should be noted that they are merely a
policy-making institution and not the implementing agency of waste management. In addition,
since there is no cooperation between the MoLGPC, which has control over the LAs that
execute the decisions made by the CEA, and the CEA, there were many cases of delays and
suspensions in the implementation stage15.
Other than this programme, the UNOPS is planning to implement SWM projects in the five
target municipalities in Jaffna in the Northern Province and is currently seeking funds. They are
also considering the possibility of assistance to the coastal district (Chillaw, Negombo, etc.) of
the Western Province where their waste problem is serious.
3.6.2 KOICA
a. Construction of the Dompe Final Disposal Site

KOICA started the project for Sri Lanka’s first sanitary landfill in Maligawatte in 2008 with the
CEA as a counterpart. The construction started from 2014 and the operation started in April
2015. The Korea Kunhwa Engineering & Consulting Co., Ltd. was in charge of the design.
KOICA and the Sri Lankan Government funded the project with 4.5 million USD and $ 1.5
million USD respectively16.
It was designed for a cluster system in the beginning of the project but only accepts waste from
the Dompe PS due to opposition from the community. In Sri Lanka, not only in the case of the
Dompe landfill site but across the country, there is always strong public opposition towards the
construction of such waste treatment facilities and many of the projects have been suspended.
Therefore, careful consideration and consultation with residents are needed in this regard.
b. Construction of Incineration Facility in the Kotikawattha Mulleriyawa PS

KOICA is implementing the construction project of incineration in the Kotikawattha
14
UNOPS Homepage:
（https://www.unops.org/english/News/UNOPS-in-action/Pages/Converting-waste-into-benefits-for-the-entire-community.aspx）
（viewed on July 28, 2015）
15
Based on the results of the interview with UNOPS on September 4, 2015
16
JST-JICA SATREPS Project: Environment Business Survey in Sri Lanka (May, 2014)
41
Mulleriyawa PS with the CEA as a counterpart. It is designed to receive 22 – 25tons/day for

incineration out of 40 ton/day of waste collected in the region and the total cost of O&M is
estimated at 800,000USD annually.
c. Pilot Project for Volume Based Bag (VBB) System

The KOICA has been planning to introduce the volume based bag (VBB) system with the
WMA as a counterpart since 2013. They started the pilot project in October 2015 and sell
plastic bags (20L) for mixed waste for 40Rs each.
In Sri Lanka, waste collection service has been provided for residents for free of charge in most
areas, therefore residents are not willing to pay money for such services. However, it is essential
for the LAs to ensure sufficient budgets for SWM for the establishment of a sustainable waste
management system as well as construction of such facilities. It is important to attempt to
introduce such a system.
3.6.3 Korean Economic Development Cooperation Fund（EDCF）

The EDCF has been implementing the construction project of sanitary landfill in four cities
(Anuradhapura, Kandy, Colombo, and Hikadduwa) from May 2014 to February 2018 with the
MoMDE as a counterpart. The total budget of the project is 42 million USD and the landfill
construction sites include Monriviawatte, Payagola, Gonadhikawatte, and Keerikulama. They
are now in the detailed design stage and the Korean Kunhwa Engineering & Consulting Co., Ltd.
is in charge of the design.
Each of the sanitary landfills is designed for as a cluster system covering 20 LAs. Regarding the
Payagola disposal site, there has been strong opposition from residents living in the vicinity of
the original planned disposal site, Panadura, and so the site was changed to Payagola and thus
progress is slower than the other sites (currently under the review of the F/S). The outline of
each site is shown below.
Table 3-15: The outline of EDCF project site
Total site Landfill
Name of DS Capacity Lifespan Service target LAs
area area
7 LAs including
Monriviawatte 8.1ha 3.4ha 37.8t/d 32 years
Rajgama PS
11 LAs including
Gonadhikawatte 11.3ha 3.9ha 76/t/d 20 years
Udunuwara PS
2 LAs including East
Keerikulama 9.7ha 4.6ha 15.2t/d 32 years
Nuwaragampalatha PS
Although the project has been signed with the MoMDE, the LAs are in charge of its operation
after the construction of the facility. There have been such concerns that the MoMDE has no
control over the LAs and the LA has neither technical skills nor financial capacity to cover the
cost of O&M after the construction of the facilities17.
3.6.4 Asian Development Bank (ADB)
a. Local Government Enhancement Sector Project (LGESP)

The ADB has implemented the "Local Government Enhancement Sector Project (LGESP)"
from September 2011 to December 2016, which includes a waste management component. The
target sites are 108 LAs in seven provinces excluding the Northern Province and the Eastern
Province (all are pradeshiya sabhas). LGESP is supporting the 108 LAs to develop reform plans
17
Based on the results of the interview with EDCF on September 3, 2015
42
and SWM action plans. SWM action plans had been developed together with the Project
Management Unit (PMU) under the command of a technical officer of the LA and have already
been developed in all of the target LAs. According to the developed action plans, they have
been implementing home composting, community awareness activities, and waste separation
and also provided 200 home compost bins, tractor and collection equipment for each LA. In
addition, compost centres have been constructed with a two-step loan in four PSs (Agalawatta,
Hambantota, Wilgamuwa, and Balangoda)18.
b. Mainstreaming Integrated Solid Waste Management in Asia

The ADB has implemented regional technical assistance called "Mainstreaming Integrated Solid
Waste Management in Asia" since December 2013, which includes Sri Lanka as a target
country. SWM is also one of the components and two cities will be selected but are still
undetermined.
Other than that, the project investigation of SWM that covers the Eastern and the Northern
provinces such as Trincomalee, has been implemented but is still in the proposal stage.
3.6.5 World Bank
a. Metro Colombo Urban Development Project

The World Bank has implemented the “Metro Colombo Urban Development Project” with the
Ministry of Defence and Urban Development as a C/P from 2012 to 2017. The project includes
five target sectors such as flood protection, the central government administration, SWM, urban
transport and the sub-national government administration. The total project budget is 326
million USD, of which 6% is allocated for SWM mainly for the improvement of the waste
collection system19.
b. Strategic Cities Development Project

The World Bank has implemented the “Strategic Cities Development Project” with the Ministry
of Economic Development as a counterpart from 2014 to 2019. The total project budget is
192.08 million USD and SWM is included in its component. The target areas include the Kandy
District and the Galle District20.
3.6.6 VNG International (International Co-operation Agency of the Association of

Netherlands Municipalities) & Velsen helps Galle Foundation
a. LOGO South Country Programme Sri Lanka

The VNG International and Velsen Helps Galle Foundation have jointly implemented the
“LOGO South Country Programme Sri Lanka” for the tsunami affected area to support the
administrative capacity building of LAs since 2004. This project aims to develop integrated
SWM plans and the project plan in such target areas as Galle, Akameemana, Habaraduwa,
Welligama and Matara. In the beginning of the project, each LA carried out their activities
individually with the support of the VNG but in 2007 a regional approach has been taken by
involving the governor of the Southern Province as a counterpart. After that, the cooperation
between LAs and commitment to the project have been secured. Consequently, the project was
18
ADB Homepage http://www.adb.org/projects/42459-013/main (viewed on September 6, 2015)
19
World Bank Home page: (http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P122735/metro-colombo-urban-development-project?lang=en)
(viewed on July 28, 2015)
20
World Bank Homepage: http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P130548?lang=en (Viewed on September 3, 2015）
43
decided to continue after 200921.
3.6.7 Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM)
a. MCP (Canada/Sri Lanka Municipal Cooperation Program)

The FCM has implemented the MCP (Canada/Sri Lanka Municipal Cooperation Program) with
the MoLGPC as a counterpart with the financial support of the Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA) in the tsunami affected area since 2005. The target LAs include
Baticaloa, Trincomalee, Ampara, Galle, and Matara and it covers good governance, gender, and
SWM.
3.6.8 SEVANATHA Urban Resource Center

Community Based Solid Waste Management Project in Matale and Rathnapura Cities
(Integrated Resource Recovery Centre Project - IRRC)
SEVANATHA is a NGO founded in 1989 in Colombo. They have implemented the
"Community Based Solid Waste Management Project in Matale and Rathnapura Cities
(Integrated Resource Recovery Centre Project - IRRC)" with the financial and technical
assistance of UN-ESCAP since 2007. The IRRC aims to promote a business model for the
implementation of the 3R approach based on the perspective that producing sufficient benefits
from waste is necessary for the establishment of sustainable SWM. In Matale, intensive
community awareness activities have been carried out to promote waste separation and currently
seven tons of organic compost is being produced daily. The compost plant, constructed in 2014
in Kanadola of the Rathnapura City, produces five tons of compost daily22.
3.6.9 Energy Forum
a. Integrated Sustainable Waste Management Center, Hambantota

Energy Forum is an NGO founded in 1991, aiming to promote renewable energy and
sustainable SWM. With financial assistance from WASTE Netherlands and VNG International,
they had implemented the SWM capacity development project called the "Integrated
Sustainable Waste Management Center, Hambantota" from 2007 to 2010. They established the
Town Clearing Society (TCS) which was made the SWM section independent from the
Hambantota UC and implemented the production and sales business of the compost and plastic
chips in the Hambantota disposal site in order to achieve financial independence23. This kind of
assistance reveals the establishment of a secured system, which enables benefits to be generated
from waste for sustainable SWM.
3.6.10 Sri Lankan Government
a. Metro Colombo Solid Waste Management Project

The Sri Lankan Government is planning a project to transport waste to be collected in the
Colombo MC to the disposal site in the Puttalam District by train. This is called the “Metro
Colombo Solid Waste Management Project”. Since it is impossible for the MC to establish a
new disposal site due to the lack of land, the plan is to reload the collected waste in the
21
VNG International “LOGO South Country Program Sri Lanka”
http://www.cities-localgovernments.org/committees/cib/Upload/compendium/EN_38_LOGO_South_Country_Programme_Sri_Lan
ka.pdf（2006）
22
SEVANATHA Home page http://www.sevanatha.org.lk/ongoing-project-community-based-solid-waste-management.html
（viewed on July 28, 2015）
23
Energy Forum Homepage http://efsl.lk/AboutUs.aspx (viewed on September 4, 2015）
44
Kolannawa Transfer Station, which is planned to be constructed in the existing Meethotamulla

disposal site, and transfer it to a new final disposal site in Puttalam by train (20ft container x 26
units). The EIA has already been submitted to the CEA, but it is said that the actual operation
will start after three years even if it is approved. The total project budget is estimated at 107
million USD (SLR 14,017 million) and the operation costs of the Puttalam disposal site are
estimated at 10.8USD/ton24. The outline of the projects related to the SWM of each donor is
summarized in the following table.
24
Based on the results of the interview with CMC on August 28, 2015
45
Table 3-16: Projects Related to the SWM of Each Donor
Donor Year Project title Project cost Location Main Facility Remark
2007- Environmental Remediation US$ 14.3millio Ampala 7 Engineered landfills, 5  Regional disposal of solid waste
EU (UNOPS) 2013 Programme (ERP) n:2007-2011 District, compost facilities, 1 transfer  Community awareness & capacity building
(phase1), Eastern station, 4 recycling stores,  Installation of User Fee Scheme in 4LAs
US$ 2.91millio Province waste collection equipment  Collection improvement
n:2011-2013(p etc  Establishment of Data Base on Business & HH in 10 LAs
hase2)  Formulation of SWM by-law
 Business and market development for compost
EU (UNOPS) 2013 Environmental Remediation Baticaloa Engineered landfills,  Community awareness & capacity building
Programme (ERP) District, compost facilities, transfer  Installation of User Fee Scheme
Eastern station, recycling stores,  Collection improvement
Province waste collection equipment  Formulation of SWM by-law
etc.  Business and market development for compost
KOICA 2008- Dompe Sanitary LF project US$ 4.5 Dompe PS, Construction of composting  C/P: CEA
2015 million By Maligawatte, plant complexes and  Waste amount: 10 tons/day
KOICA, Western engineered landfill (area: 31  Constructed in Apr. 2015
US$1.5million Province ha)  Designed by Korean Kunhwa Engineering & Consulting Co., Ltd
by SLGov’t  Originally designed for cluster system but only accept waste collected
in Dompe PS due to public protest.
46
KOICA 2012 Kotikawatthaha Mulleriyawa PS Kotikawatthah Construction of incinerator  C/P: CEA
a Mulleriyawa in Kotikawatthaha  22～25t/day out of total 40t/d waste generated in Kotikawatthaha
PS Mulleriyawa PS Mulleriyawa PS will be treated.
 Estimated cost for O&M will be 800,000USD
KOICA 2013 Volume Based Bag (VBB) Pilot US $10,000 Western  C/P: WMA
Project Province  Volume Based Bag system for revenue raising
 40LKR. for 20L plastic bag for mixed waste
 Pilot scale project will be implemented from Oct. 2015
EDCF 2014- US$ 42million Anuradhapura, Construction of 4 sanitary  Currently in detailed design stage
2018 Kandy, LFs in Monriviawatte,  Designed by Korean Kunhwa Engineering & Consulting Co., Ltd.
Colombo, Payagola, Gonadhikawatte,  Cluster System covering 20LAs
Hikadduwa Keerikulama  Payagola LF is delayed due to public protest and currently under
evaluation of F/S
ADB 2011- Local Government Enhancement 108 LAs (PS 200 home compost bins for  Formulation of Reform Plan and SWM Action Plan
2016 Sector Project (LGESP) level) in all each LA, provision of waste  All 108 LAs completed SWM A/P
provinces collection and landfill  Home compost
except equipment, Compost centre  Community awareness activities
Northern in 4PS(Agalawatta,  Waste segregation at source
Province and Hambantota, Wilgamuwa,
Eastern Balangoda)
Province
ADB 2013 Mainstreaming Integrated Solid  Regional Technical Assistance

Waste Management in Asia  SWM is one of the components
 2 cities will be selected but not yet selected.
World Bank 2012- Metro Colombo Urban US$ 326millio  C/P: Ministry of Defence and Urban Development
2017 Development Project n  Consists of Flood Protection, Central Government Administration,
SWM, Urban Transport, Sub-national Government Administration
 6% of the total budget is allocated for SWM
World Bank 2014- Strategic Cities Development US$ 192.08mil Kandy district,  SWM is one of the components
2019 Project lion Galle district
Federation of Canadian 2005 MCP(Canada/Sri Lanka Baticaloa,  To improve local governance (operations management, service
Municipalities (FCM) , Municipal Cooperation Program) Trincomalee, delivery and strengthened participatory mechanisms) in LAs that
CIDA Ampara, were affected by the Tsunami in 2004.
Galle, Matara  SWM is one of the components
47
VNG International, 2004 LOGO South Country Galle,  Formulation of Integrated SWM plan,
Velsen helps Galle Programme Sri Lanka Akameemana,  Regional approach was taken with the Governor of the Southern
Foundation Habaraduwa, Province after 2007.
Welligama and  Project extended after 2009.
Matara
SEVANATHA, 2007- Community Based SWM Project Matale MC Construction of IRRCs at  Aiming at promoting a business MoMDE to implement the 3R
UN-ESCAP on in Matale and Rathnapura Cities and Kanadola in Rathnapura (Reduce, Reuse and Recycling) approach
going (Integrated Resource Recovery Rathnapura MC and in Matale MC  Matale IRRC handles 7 t/d of organic waste and collects and
Centre Project - IRRC MC separates all the recyclable materials for selling at the local market.
 5t/d capacity IRR Centre was built at Kanadola in Rathnapura in 2014
and currently running its operation.
Energy Forum, WASTE 2007- Integrated Sustainable Waste Hambantota Compost plant, Plastic  Establishment of Town Clearing Society (TCS）
Netherlands, VNG 2010 Management Center, UC recycling facility  Establishment of self-support accounting system through manufacture
International Hambantota and sale of compost and plastic chip material
Sri Lankan Government 2012- Metro Colombo Solid Waste US $107 Puttalam Sanitary Land Fill in  Waste generated in the Metro Colombo Region 1200MT/d will be
on Management Project million (≒ District, Aruakkalu in the Puttalam transported by train from a transfer station at Meethotamulla to
going LKR 14017 Meethotamulla District, Transfer station in Sanitary Land Fill in Aruakkalu in the Puttalam District
million) Meethotamulla  EIA already completed and under evaluation.
 Future operation cost for LF in Puttalam will be 10.8USD/t
4 Basic Information of the Priority Local Authorities

4.1 Kataragama Pradeshiya Sabahas in Uva Province -
4.1.1 Outline of the LA (Local Authority)

Kataragama is in the Monaragala District of the Uva Province, in the southeast of Sri Lanka. It
is located at the entrance of the Yala National Park, known for safari, and is a sacred place for
the Sri Lankan people. The total area is 586.84 km2.
Although Kataragama was a small village surrounded by jungles in the early days, the city has
undergone many improvements with successive governments investing in public transportation,
medical facilities, business development and hotel services since the 1950s. When the
Kataragama festival is grandly held from July to August every year, the Perahera parade is
performed throughout the town every night and a number of people visit there from abroad as
well as from Sri Lanka. The main industries are tourism, hotel services, wood processing and
agriculture25.
The climate of Kataragama is hot all throughout the year. The average maximum temperature is
around 25-28 degrees Celsius. In Kataragama, the six months from October to February and
from April to June make up the rainy season. The remaining times are the dry season which
sometimes causes drought. The average rainfall is 1,000-1,500ml per year26.
The Kataragama PS (Municipal Council) has 5 GNs (Grama Niladhari –Village Officer)
divisions. The floating population reaches up to 30,000 people as many tourists and pilgrims
visit the temples. The population trend from 2010-2015 of the Kataragama PS is as follows.
Table 4-1: Population Trend of Kataragama PS (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population 21,867 22,187 22,415 21,912 22,087 NA
Source: Divisional Secretariat, Kataragama (Population is estimated by the population growth

rate)
4.1.2 Current Status and Problems of Solid Waste Management
a. Organization and Legal System
a.1 Legislation and Policy

The Kataragama PS implements solid waste management activities based on the Pradeshiya
Sabhas Act (No. 15 of 1987).
a.2 Solid Waste Management Plan

The PS has formulated an action plan related to SWM in 2010. Also, with the support of the
Pura Negma "Local Government Enhancement Sector Project (LGESP)27", implemented by the
UDA and ADB, a master plan for waste management was formulated in 2014. Based on this
25
Based on the interview with the Secretary of Kataragama PS (November 6, 2015)
26
Kataragama Divisional Secretariat Annual Report 2014 (Divisional Secretariat, Kataragama)
27
Targets are 108 municipalities (all are Pradeshiya Sabaha level) in seven provinces with the exception of the Northern Province
and the Eastern Province. It helps the municipalities to formulate a Reform Plan and SWM Action Plan. The implementation period
is from September 2011 to December 2016.
48
action plan, the PS implements public awareness activities, promotion of home composting, and
waste separation.
a.3 Organization
In Kataragama PS, the Public Health Section is in charge of solid waste management. The head
of the Public Health Section is the Technical Officer (TO) who supervises the collection (truck)
drivers. Under that, there is a Labor Administrator who supervises street sweeping and waste
collection that Road Sweepers and Health Labourers conduct. The Development Assistant is
appointed by the Uva Provincial Council and assigned to a subject officer in waste management
in the Kataragama PS to support the TO. The role of the Public Health Section is as follows:
 Waste collection and transportation Service
 Public health activities (dengue fever prevention)
 Road sweeping
 Public awareness of waste separation
 Disposal of animal bodies
In the Kataragama PS, there are no MOHs (Medical Officer of Health) nor PHIs. Although there
is one MOH and two PHIs in the Provincial Health Ministry, they come to support dengue
prevention activities only upon request from the PS. They are not actively involved in SWM
activities.
The following figure shows the organizational structure and the staff of the Kataragama PS.
Figure 4-1: Organizational chart of whole Kataragama PS
49
Figure 4-2 Organizational chart of SWM section in Kataragama PS
Table 4-2: Staff related to SWM in Kataragama PS

Staff Number Remarks
Engineer 0
1 Head of Public Health
TO(Technical Officer)
Section
Subject Officer of SWM (Development 1
Assistant)
Labor Administrator 1
Work Administrator 1 Occasional Support
Health Administrator 1 Occasional Support
MOH(Medical officer of health) 0
PHI(Public health inspector) 0
SV(Supervisor) 0
Collection workers Permanent 35
Temporary 21
Road Sweepers Permanent 12
Driver Permanent 2 +3 stand-by drivers
Temporary 0
Disposal site workers Permanent 0
Other (Compost plant) Permanent 11 Including 7workers+3secur
ity+1tractor driver
Total
50
a.4 Issues of Organization and Legal System

Compared to the MC and the UC, the PS constantly lacks human resources. The technical
officer (TO) and subject officer of SWM are supposed to play the main roles in waste
management activities, however they tend to be occupied with daily activities and it seems that
only the secretary understands the whole waste management system.
Also, there is a shortage of collection workers so there are many complaints that the collection
service is not provided in a timely manner.
b. Technical System
b.1 Storage and Discharge

In the Kataragama PS, the separate collection system has just been introduced in some areas at
the end of October 2015. However, containers for separating organic waste have not yet been
distributed to each household. Therefore, residents have been instructed to discharge separated
organic waste and other waste in a different plastic bags. Since the door-to-door collection is
provided by the PS, residents put waste on the roadside in the morning of the designated
collection day.
b.2 Collection Subject

The Kataragama PS directly collects and transports waste from residential and commercial areas.
On the other hand, the PS is not in charge of collection in the temple area so the temple related
staff collect and transport waste by themselves. In addition, when there are religious festivals,
the Physical Planning Dept. 28(affiliated with the Ministry of Housing and Construction)
collects waste generated from these activities as only the PS itself cannot deal with the huge
amount. Under the supervision of TO, two collection drivers and 35 collection workers collect
waste.
b.3 Collection Method

The collection area of the PS is divided into three areas; the Sella Kataragama area near the
Sella Kataragama disposal site, the city area which is the center of the PS, and the Wedasifi area
near the Galapitagalayaya disposal site. The city area and the Wedasifi area are divided into
three areas; A, B, C. The separate collection area includes area B and C but not area A, the most
commercialized areas. In those areas, waste is separated into organic and other waste.
28
There is a branch office of the Physical Planning Dept. in the temple area.
51
Figure 4-3: Waste collection area and disposal sites in Kataragama PS (as of Nov.
2015)
Collection coverage of the PS is around 40% by area basis. The following table shows the
collection method and frequency of waste.
Table 4-3: Waste collection methods and frequency of Kataragama PS
Area Type of waste Collection method Frequency

Area A and House-to-house
Sella Kataragama Mixed waste Everyday
collection
House-to-house
Organic waste Twice/week
collection
Area B & C
House-to-house
Other waste Once/week
collection
b.4 Collection Amount

Waste collected by the Kataragama PS is transported to the Galapitagalayaya DS and the Sella
Kataragama DS. Since there is no truck scale, the accurate waste amount is not recorded.
However, if it is estimated from the number of truck loads (1 load ≒ 1.5ton), it is 8 loads/day,
so the collected amount is about 12 ton/day.
b.5 Collection Fee

The Kataragama PS does not collect any waste collection fees from households. On the other
hand, they collect fees from hotels and guesthouses (depending on the size) in the PS every
month. They do not collect any fees from other business entities.
52
Table 4-4: Collection fee for hotels in Kataragama PS
Type of waste Size of hotels Fee(LKR/month)

General waste Less than 5 rooms 1,000
General waste 5-20 rooms 2,000
General waste More than 20 rooms 3,000
Since the separate collection system has been introduced, a new charging system will be soon
applied based on the Pradeshiya Sabhas Act (No. 15 of 1987) as below.
Table 4-5: New collection fee after introduction of separate collection in Kataragama PS
(not effective as of Nov. 2015)
Type of waste Type of business Fee(LKR/month)

Organic waste Hotels Max. 4,000
Other waste Hotels Max. 6,000
Organic waste Other businesses than hotels Max. 1,000
Other waste Other businesses than hotels Max. 1,500
b.6 Collection Vehicles

The PS has three tractors for waste collection and modified one tractor for the collection of
night soils into waste collection. Therefore, they have four tractors for waste collection in total.
All of the vehicles are almost 100 % in operation although they frequently need some minor
repair works. The following table shows the number of collection vehicles.
Table 4-6: Collection vehicles of Kataragama PS
Number not in
Type of vehicles Number operation Remarks
(average)
Tractor with trailer 4 0 All are working but frequent
minor repair work needed
Tractor with gully sackers 1 Used for compost plant
Hand cart 6
Tipper 1
The PS keeps the driving record of each vehicle including mileage and collection areas
covered.
b.7 Maintenance Methods of Collection Vehicles

The Kataragama PS has neither workshop nor engineer; they outsource all repair works.
Whenever the drivers find problems, they report to the secretary and the TO and the TO
investigates the problems. The driver submits a request letter to the development assistant, then
the development assistant estimates the costs. If the purchase or repair work costs less than
1,000 LKR, it will be paid in cash. If it costs less than 5,000 LKR, the Development
Committee’s approval is necessary (but no quotation is needed). If it costs more than 5,000
LKR, the Development Committee’s approval and quotations from three different sources are
necessary.
b.8 Intermediate Treatment

In Kataragama, there is one compost plant which consists of a biogas facility and a recycling
center where recyclables are sorted and stored. This plant has been established by the Swedish
53
Cooperative Centre called AfATE (Alliance for Appropriate Technology Exchange) in 2013 but
when they left in 2014, it failed. Then, the Hambandotta SMDF (Social Mobilization
Development Foundation) came to support the PS in resuming separate collection in August
2015. The PS has just resumed separate collection in collaboration with the NGO29 since the
end of October 2015. The PS provides workers, water, electricity and uniforms, etc and the
NGO gives financial support and advice.
The structure of the compost is an aerobic fermentation system, where waste is rotated over the
three phases within the concrete rocks with holes for ventilation. Leachate is stored in the tank
and pumped up to use for the adjustment of the water content of the compost (namely, is added
to maintain the appropriate moisture content in the compost heaps). The organic waste
transported to the compost plant comes from a separate collection area (the area B & C) and the
total amount is 7 load/month (around 0.35 ton/day). The production of compost is 700
kgs/month and the selling price is 10 LKR/kg. Most is sold to the residents at the weekend
market. The compost residue is buried in a pit within the compound. The details are shown in
the following table.
Table 4-7: Intermediate treatment facilities in Kataragama PS
Year of
Execution
Type Address Capacity establishm Remarks
body
ent
PS & 0.35 Fenced by electric wires to avoid
Compost plant 2013
NGO(the ton/day elephants.
Small-scale Galapitagalaya The produced biogas is used for
land is 5kg/day 2013
biogas facility ya the kitchen in the compost plant.
leased by
,Raja Mawata,
the Dept. Not in operation as of Nov. 2015
Recycling Kataragama
of NA 2013 as separate collection has just
facility Forestry) started.
Photo：Compost plant in Kataragama PS
29
The NGO members do not consist of the community nearby the plant but of traders and social activists in Kataragama PS.
54
Photo：Recycling facility in Kataragama PS
b.9 Final Disposal

Kataragama has three final disposal sites (see Figure 4-3 of b2.2). The PS is in charge of the
Galapitigala Yaya disposal site and the Sella Kataragama disposal site. The other disposal site is
located in the temple area and the Physical Planning Department collects and disposes waste
generated from the worshipers and the temple areas.
Approximately 75% of waste collected by the PS is transported to the Galapitigala Yaya
disposal site, and 25% to the Sella Kataragama disposal site. Both disposal sites are open
dumping sites and daily landfilling is not conducted.
(1) Galapitigala Yaya Disposal Site
It is located approximately 7km southwest from the PS City Hall and the total area is two acres
(0.81ha). The land had been used in leasehold from the Divisional Secretariat in 1987 but was
transferred to the PS from 2001 to the present.
Usually nobody stays at the disposal sites but the collection driver reports the situation to the
TO. Approximately 6 load/day (about 10 tons) of waste is disposed. There are about 50 wild
elephants living in the surroundings of the disposal site and they sometimes come to seek food.
About 1.0 km
from the main
road
55
Collected waste is unloaded where it is accessible. Surrounding environment is poor due to bad
odor and flies.
Access road to the DS: disposal site becomes When DS cannot be accessed waste is dumped
inaccessible during the rainy season along the access road
(2) Sella Kataragama Disposal Site

It is located approximately 7km northwest from the PS City Hall and the total area is two acres
(0.8ha). The land has been used in leasehold (annually updated) from the Provincial Secretariat.
The PS collects general waste and septic tank sludge in the Sella Kataragama area. The
collection amount of general waste is two load/day (about 3 tons/day). On the other hand the
septic tank sludge is dumped into the hole, and local residents complain about it overflowing
during the rainy season.
A site survey of this disposal site was not conducted as we had no access to the site because of
heavy rain. For this reason only the photograph and satellite photo of the access road are shown
below.
There was no evidence of waste scattering as observed from the satellite photo.
56
Katharagama Road
Sella Katharagama DS
Passage from Kataragama road Kataragama road
b.10 Issues of Technical System

Regarding collection and transportation, no specific containers for separated organic waste are
distributed to the residents, therefore it is inefficient for collection workers to open the plastic
bags to check whether it is organic waste or other waste each time they load waste. In order to
make it more efficient and hygienic, containers for separate collection should be distributed to
the residents.
Collection service is only provided to the commercial area and the hotels; in the residential area
it is based on self-disposal such as open burning and burying. The UC has many tourists,
therefore the improvement of collection service rates is an urgent issue for environmental
conservation.
As for the intermediate facility, it is a challenge to operate the compost plant sustainably in the
future.
There are four dumping sites (final disposal site) in the PS; two sites are operated by the PS and
one site is located in the temple area and the waste is disposed by the Kataragama branch of the
57
National Physical Planning Dept. The remaining site is an illegal dumping site. All of the final
disposal sites are open dumping and not managed well. It is an urgent issue to establish a
management system for final disposal site as the final destination of municipal solid waste.
c. Recycling Activities
c.1 Source Separation

In some areas of the Kataragama PS, buckets for separated organic waste were distributed by
the WMA to residents in 2013. However, residents used them for cooking or washing at home
as the public awareness activities were not fully implemented.
In the Kataragama PS, separate collection is introduced in some areas in order to recover
organic waste to be brought to the compost plant. Additionally, source separation is being
promoted. On the other hand, no collection service is provided by the PS in most areas,
therefore residents bury waste in a pit in the backyard or burn it on site. Also, the valuable
materials are sold to informal recyclers.
We did not find any community recycling systems or recycling activities.
c.2 Reduction of Organic Waste

The Kataragama PS does not subsidise any home compost bins. Moreover, the incentive to do
home composting is considered to be low because the coverage area of waste collection services
is high and there is a large commercial area.
The Kataragama PS, with the support of Pura Negma project, distributed home compost bins to
70 tax-payers of the assessment tax as of November 2015. It is planned to provide 200 more
bins within the next 3 months.
c.3 Recycling Valuable Materials

It is said that four middleman shops that buy and sell valuable materials exist in the suburbs of
the Kataragama PS. We conducted an interview with one of these shops. Most of the valuables
are collected by middleman shop workers with handcarts in the neighbouring area. The
summary of the interview is shown below.
58
Table 4-8: Purchase of valuable materials at Middleman Shop

Collection
Type of amount Buying price Selling price
Destination Remarks
Valuables (LKR/kg) (LKR/kg)
（ton/mth）
Plastic －－－－ Not collected because
the market value is low
PET －－－－ for its bulky volume
Recycler at
Polythene 0.3 10 45
Colombo
Other than Metal 2. Not
Metal 1 0.3 －－－ sold because the market
value is low
Middleman at Fish can etc.
Metal 2 0.25 8 15
Colombo
Recycler at Sale after crushing
Glass 1 2 5.75
Colombo
Recycler at
Cardboard 0.5 5 18
Colombo
Local Flower Reuse as wrapping paper
Newspaper 0.2 15 25
Shop
Recycler at Mainly used book
Paper 0.3 5 18
Colombo
＊Based on the interview with Middleman Shop owner (November 5, 2015)
Photo：Middleman shop in the city
c.4 Issues of Recycling Activities

While the system of separate collection has only just begun in some areas of the Kataragama PS,
it is necessary to first encourage residents to make sure they separate their waste (source
separation). It is necessary to establish a system (effective and hygienic storage and discharge
method, setting a separate collection date and time, providing reliable collection services, etc.)
that can be easily understood and adopted by residents.
Recycling of valuable materials is performed in middleman shops. There are types of
recyclables which are not bought and sold even though they are marketable. Such materials such
as Plastic and PET are bulky so the market value is comparatively low. Therefore, they are not
recovered and found at the final disposal site. Also, for most of the recyclers the final
destination of valuables are located in the capital Colombo so the transportation cost is high and
therefore the price they are will to pay is low. Compression and palletisation of valuable
materials is necessary to increase the added value.
59
d. Public Awareness
d.1 Current Situation of Public Awareness Activities

In the Kataragama PS, separate collection has been implemented in some areas and public
awareness activities to promote source separation have been carried out. An outline of public
awareness activities are shown below.
Table 4-9: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Kataragama
Public Awareness Activities
Execution body PS(Supported by the CEA and PHI)
Title Source separation activities
Budget source None (SMDF is expected to provide financial support in future)
Budget amount None
Public announcement through loud speaker
Methods
Monitoring of separate collection by police
Besides that, in accordance with the time of festivals, the Kataragama PS holds a meeting with
the Trade Association and instructs them to improve the handling of waste in the PS.
d.2 Participation Level and Manners of Citizens

The level of cooperation of the residents for source separation is low because separate collection
has just started. Many of the complaints that the PS receives from residents are related to poor
waste discharge manners of the tourists and worshipers of the temples.
d.3 Issues of Public Awareness Activities

In the Kataragama PS, public awareness activities for source separation are conducted but the
level of cooperation of the residents is still low. It is essential to set the discharging rules (target
waste for separation, collection date, discharge point, and discharge method) in order for
residents to easily understand. It is also necessary to implement environmental education in
schools as well as activities to improve discharge manners at the same time.
e. Finance
e.1 Financial Condition of the Pradeshiya Sabha
The table below shows the past three years of financial data for the Katharagama Pradeshiya
Sabha (Katharagama PS). According to the table, the difference between annual revenues and
expenditures of the pradeshiya sabha has been positive in each year and its share in total annual
revenues accounted for 6% on average. However, observing the condition year by year, the
amount of total expenditures was at same levels with those of the revenues except in the year
2014.
Table 4-10: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Katharagama PS (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Averages
No Category 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 71,622 79,156 85,748 78,842
2 Actual
Revenue 32,663 44,495 74,882 50,680 100.0%
Own-source revenue 18,329 0,330 20,455 19,705 38.9%
Grant 14,334 24,165 54,427 30,976 61.1%
Expenditure 32,400 43,571 67,330 47,767 94.3%
Recurrent 30,625 42,387 45,790 39,600 78.1%
Capital 1,776 1,184 21,540 8,167 16.1%
Profit or loss 263 924 7,552 2,913 5.7%
Source: Katharagama PS, “Programme Budget: 2013-2015”
60
The share of own-source revenues is roughly 40% while that of grants was estimated as roughly
60% (table below).
Table 4-11: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Katharagama PS (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Types of Revenues 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Own-Source Revenue:
Rates & Taxes 1,241 1,512 864 1,206 2.4%
Rents 6,393 8,031 7,784 7,403 14.6%
License 452 732 756 647 1.3%
Fees For Services 1,314 1,976 1,759 1,683 3.3%
Warrant Costs And Fines 1,841 1,989 0 1,277 2.5%
Other Income 7,087 6,090 9,292 7,490 14.8%
Total Own-Source Revenue 18,329 20,330 20,455 19,705 38.9%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 14,334 21,060 26,532 20,642 40.7%
Salaries 14,334 21,060 26,532 20,642 40.7%
Council Members Allowances 0.0%
Other Recurrent Grant 0.0%
Capital Grants 0 3,105 27,895 10,333 20.4%
Total Grants 14,334 24,165 54,427 30,976 61.1%
Total 32,663 44,495 74,882 50,680 100.0%
Source: Katharagama PS, “Programme Budget: 2013～2015”
The share of capital grants in the total revenues is relatively large, accounting for around 20%.
On the other hand, the amount of total recurrent expenditures occupies 80% in the total
expenditures of the pradeshiya sabha and its amount is almost double in comparison with that of
the own-source revenues. According to the tables, the pradeshiya sabha has not spent all the
capital grants received in the latest two years.
Table 4-12: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Katharagama PS (Unit: Thousand
LKR)
Annual Average
No Types of Expenditures 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Recurrent Expenditures:
Personal Emoluments 20,591 28,121 33,180 27,297 57.1%
Travelling 307 596 359 421 0.9%
Requisites And Equipment 1,530 3,596 3,582 2,903 6.1%
Repairs And Maintenance Of Capital
835 1,936 1,353 1,374 2.9%
Assets
Transportation, Communication, Utility
4,185 6,275 6,805 5,755 12.0%
And Other Services
Interest 0 0 0 0 0.0%
Grants, Subsidies And Contributions 597 507 512 538 1.1%
Pensions, Retirements, Benefits And
0 0 0 0 0.0%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures 2,580 1,356 0 1,312 2.7%
Total Recurrent Expenditures 30,625 42,387 45,790 39,600 82.9%
2 Capital Expenditure 1,776 1,184 21,540 8,167 17.1%
Total Expenditure 32,400 43,571 67,330 47,767 100.0%
Source: Katharagama PS, “Programme Budget: 2013-2015”
According to financial data provided by the Katharagama PS, the pradeshiya sabha has limited
financial sources. As a result of the block grants released by the central government, the total
expenditures equalled to the total revenues of Katharagama PS.
Although it is not facing financial difficulties, it cannot necessarily be considered that the
pradeshiya sabha has been implementing public services sufficiently. Investments for quality
improvement of public services force the local authority to depend on external sources.
61
e.2 SWM Finance

In the Katharagama PS, all resources of the Public Health Inspectors’ (PHI) section are utilized
for implementing all activities undertaken by the section. Therefore, it was impossible to
separate SWM expenses from those of other activities that the section implements.
The table below shows the financial data of the PHI section for the past three years.
Table 4-13: Annual Revenues and Expenses of PHI Section (Unit: Thousand LKR)
No Types of Expenses 2012 2013 2014
A Approved Budget 5,170 19,326 21,186
B Revenues:
1 Collected Waste Fees 136 330 629
2 Other Revenues 6,964 9,990 12,759
Total Revenues 7,101 10,320 13,387
C Actual Expenditures:
1 Personal Emoluments 10,389 14,055 15,687
2 Supplies And Materials Expenses 196 892 236
3 Repairs And Maintenance Of Vehicles 479 1,180 1,123
4 Final Disposal Payment
5 Other Expenses 2,650 3,346 3,153
Total Expenditures 13,714 19,473 20,199
Collected Waste Fees in the Total Revenues 1.9% 3.2% 4.7%

Total Revenues in the Total Expenditure 51.8% 53.0% 66.3%
Note: Part of the 2012 data is missing.
Source: Katharagama PS (part of the data is taken from “Programme Budget: 2013-2015”)
The total revenues of the PHI section equal 50% to 66% of its total expenses. However, the
revenues from the collected waste fees account for 2% to 5% in the total revenues of the section.
Therefore, it can be considered that the SWM activities were financed from other sources of the
pradeshiya sabha. .
According to the Katharagama PS, waste fees are collected only from shops and hotels as these
types of businesses generate a lot of waste. However, only 35 businesses that paid the waste fee
as of 31 October 2015.
The waste fees were set at a monthly basis and the amounts of waste have not been considered.
The table of fees is as follows.
Table 4-14: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included)
No Types of Waste Unit Tariff
1 Separated waste from traders (shops) LKR/month 1000.00
2 Unseparated waste from traders (shops) LKR/month 1500.00
3 Separated waste from guest houses, lodges and hotels LKR/month 4000.00
4 Unseparated waste from guest houses, lodges and hotels LKR/month 6000.00
*-Tax rates: Nation building tax-2%, VAT-12%
Source: Katharagama PS (results of interview survey)
e.3 Problems Identified in the SWM Financial System

Households residing along main roads and in the central parts of the pradeshiya sabha receive
waste collection service for free of charge while the households residing in the rest of the area
are not served. The pradeshiya sabha does not collect waste fees from businesses except for
some shops and hotels; and therefore, the revenues of waste fees have been limited
considerably.
62
4.1.3 Waste Amount and Composition Survey
a. Waste Generation Amount

The waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate obtained by
SATREPS in March 2014 and waste generation units obtained by a locally outsourced survey.
The results reveal that the waste generation rate is 721g/person/day.
Table 4-15: Waste Generation Amount of Kataragama PS
Generation Generation
Source Generation rate
sources (ton/day)
Residential Collection 0.41 Kg/person/day 19,010 7.8
Hotels (large) 155.00 Kg/(hotel) 1 0.2
Hotels (middle) 29.00 Kg/(hotel) 2 0.1
Hotels (small) 4.10 Kg/(hotel) 279 1.1
Restaurants (large) 66.50 Kg/(restaurant) 2 0.1
Restaurants (middle) 29.50 Kg/(restaurant) 5 0.1
Commercial Restaurants (small) 13.80 Kg/(restaurant) 94 1.3
Organic-shops (large) 11.50 Kg/(shop) 3 0.0
Organic-shops (middle) 6.00 Kg/(shop) 9 0.1
Organic-shops (small) 11.00 Kg/(shop) 30 0.3
Non-organic shops (large) 7.25 Kg/(shop) 1 0.0
Non-organic shops (small) 1.90 Kg/(shop) 80 0.2
Schools 127.50 Kg/(school) 5 0.6
Hospitals 1,087.00 Kg/(hospital) 1 1.1
Public office 20.00 Kg/(institution) 29 0.6
Bank/Private office 2.00 Kg/(institution) 8 0.0
Institutions
Buddhist temples 2.00 Kg/(temple) 32 0.1
Hindu temples 5.00 Kg/(temple) 3 0.0
Mosques 1.10 Kg/(mosque) 1 0.0
Churches 0.50 Kg/(church) 0 0.0
Large 187.50 Kg/(industry) 0 0.0
Industries
Domestic 6.00 Kg/(industry) 0 0.0
Market 120.00 Kg/market 0 0
Port 1,800.00 Kg/port 0 0
Total 13.7
b. Waste Composition
The results of the locally outsourced survey on waste composition, conducted from 6 to 11
October, are shown below.
Organic waste such as kitchen waste and green waste is 81.6 % of the total amount. The
apparent specific gravity is as heavy as 0.598 ton/m3, which reveals that the content of organic
waste is large. On the other hand, valuable materials such as paper, textile, plastic, metal, and
glass bottle are as little as 12.9%.
63
Table 4-16: Waste Composition and Apparent Specific Gravity of Kataragama PS

Category Rate
Kitchen waste 63.3%
Paper 7.1%
Textiles 0.6%
Grass & wood 18.3%
Soft Plastics 3.9%
Hard Plastics 0.5%
Rubber & leather 0.2%
Metal 0.2%
Glass & bottles 0.6%
Stone & ceramic 5.4%
Other 0.0%
100.0%
Apparent Specific Gravity 0.598 ton/m3
4.1.4 The Result of Public Opinion Survey

The demographics of the surveyed households are as follows: 99% of the surveyed households
are Sinhalese, and 1 % is Tamils. Data on the average number of people per households and
monthly income is set out in the table below.
Table 4-17: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size
Average of family Income/Turnover
Category Number of sample
members / employees (LKR/month)
High 34 4.3 172, 500
Middle 86 4.4 48, 012
Low 41 4.0 23, 476
Business 44 2.6 3, 677, 386
In the Kataragama PS, only 44 % of surveyed households are provided with a garbage
collection service, of which 36 % stated they use this service. Only 41 % of surveyed
households are “very satisfied” with the present SWM services provision, while 39 % are
“somewhat satisfied”.
Item No. of sample %

Yes 71 44
No 90 56
Total 161 100
Figure 4-4: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kataragama PS
64

Placing outside 85 53
Carrying to collection point 41 25
Carrying to collection truck 35 22
Other 0 0
Total 161 100
Figure 4-5: Method of garbage discharge by residences in KPS area

 Out of the Households’ who use the garbage collection service, the main methods of
waste discharge are shown in upper figure. The most common methods are discharging
it outside their premises for house to house collection (53%) and carrying garbage to the
collection point (25%) and to the collection truck (22%).
 Out of households who use the service, only 11 % receive a daily garbage collection
service while 56% stated that they received the service 2-3 times/week.
 61% of surveyed households discharge garbage as soon as it is generated and 28%
discharge their garbage daily.
 In general, adult females handle waste in about 84% of surveyed households.
 As shown in lower Figure, only 7% of households separate their garbage into organic
and inorganic waste at the source of generation. Only 3% of surveyed households are
not/less willing to cooperate with source separation for recycling. The rest of the
households are very much willing (89%) and somewhat willing (1%) to cooperate in the
source separated garbage collection system.
 Further, 72 % of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or
someone who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials. Hence, an
informal recycling system is well established in the Kataragama PS area.

Very much willing 143 89
Somewhat willing 2 1
Less willing 0 0
Not willing 5 3
Doing already 11 7
Total 161 100
Figure 4-6: Willingness of residences to participate in the source separated garbage

collection system in the Kataragama PS
65
 Only 13% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also
used the finished compost for their own garden.
 Not many surveyed households (75%) have ever discussed proper garbage discharge
methods at the community level.
 A notable feature is that 100% of households stated that SWM awareness programmes
are very necessary
 75% of households do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue
tax they paid for the KPS. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM
services is 42 ± 91 LKR/month per households.
 Out of all surveyed households, 12% stated that they sell/give away glass and bottles for
recycling, and 39% of residences sell/give-away plastics for recycling. But only 1% of
households sell/give-away cans and metals for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
were 1% and 19% respectively.
4.1.5 Waste Flow (2015）

The current waste flow has been prepared by analysing the locally outsourced public opinion
survey, statistical data collection, and the results of the census.
1. Waste generation
13.7 t/d
(100.0%)
2. Discharge 3. Direct haulage

8.6 t/d 0.4 t/d
(62.7%) (2.6%)
4. On-site Compost 8. On-site recycling
0.4 t/d 0.0 t/d
(2.8%) (0.1%)
5. Self disposal 7. Collection
3.7 t/d 8.6 t/d
(26.8%) (62.6%)
9. Recycling (1)
0.2 t/d
(1.6%)
6. Illegal dumping 10. Landfill
0.7 t/d 12.8 t/d
(5.1%) (93.1%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
13. Visotor's waste 12. Final disposal
4.1 t/d 12.8 t/d
(93.1%)
Figure 4-7: Waste Flow of Kataragama PS (2015)

According to the waste flow, the collection rate ((discharge amount + direct loading
amount)/generation amount) is 65.7%. Self-disposal such as burning and burying on site is
26.8%, and illegal dumping is 5.1%. The total recycling rate including compost and recycling
activities is as low as 4.7%.
One feature of the Kataragama PS is that there are a lot of worshipers at the temples and waste
generated by them is about 30% of that of residents. In addition, the waste generation amount is
as high as approximately 50 tons/day when worshipers come (including from India) in April,
July, and December.
66
4.1.6 Current Situation of Other Waste Management
a. Current Situation of Industrial Waste Management
a.1 Generation Amount & Disposal Amount

Since general waste generated by businesses such as shops is collected together with general
municipal waste, the generation amount and the disposal amount of industrial waste are not
identified.
a.2 Collection, Transportation and Disposal

General waste from businesses is collected together with general municipal waste and
discharged at the Galapitagalayaya DS. The UC is not involved in the handling of the hazardous
waste of industrial waste.
a.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) of general waste from business entities that are collected together with
mixed waste is free of charge.
b. Current Situation of Medical Waste Management
b.1 Generation Amount & Disposal Amount

In the Kataragama PS, there is only one large hospital and the total generation amount of
general waste is 1 load/week (1.5 tons/week).
b.2 Collection, Transportation and Disposal

General waste generated from the large hospital is collected by the PS once a week (additional
collection is provided upon request) and transported to the Galapitagalayaya DS. However,
medical waste is disposed by the hospital itself and the PS is not involved.
b.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) is free of charge as waste from the hospital is collected together with
general municipal waste.
c. Current Situation of Night Soil Management
c.1 Generation Amount & Disposal Amount

The accurate amount of night soil is not recorded by the PS.
c.2 Collection, Transportation and Disposal

Night soil generated by around 100 hotels and public bathrooms is collected by the Kataragama
PS and disposed at the Sella Kataragama DS. The PS collects night soil from households and
business entities only upon request.
c.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) for households and business entities is 5,000LKR/load (3,500L) but
for temples and army camps it is free of charge.
67
4.1.7 Needs for Solid Waste Management
a. Improvement of Technical System
a.1 Improvement of Collection Service Rate

The collection service rate is as low as 65.7% and more than 1/4 of waste is self-disposed.
Self-disposal includes open burning and burying and it is undesirable to burn plastics and to
bury non-degradable waste from the point of view of environmental protection. Therefore, it is
desirable for the Kataragama PS to reduce the self-disposal rate by increasing the collection
rate.
a.2 Response to the Change of Waste Generation

The Kataragama is a sacred place for Hindus at the southernmost tip of South Asia and it is also
adjacent to the Yara National Park. For these reasons, it is visited by many worshipers and
tourists. The waste generation amount during the season becomes three times more than that of
normal time, which is far beyond the capacity of the Kataragama PS. For this reason, the waste
generated in the temples is collected and disposed by the National Physical Planning
Department in the disposal site of the temples (open dumping). It is desirable to centrally
manage the waste generated in the same region to reduce the load on the environment. a.3. of
final disposal site improvement
a.3 Improvement of Disposal Site

All three disposal sites in the Kataragama PS are open dumping and have many environmental
protection issues such as waste scattering and overflow of leachate. In addition, the access road
to the disposal site is unpaved so it becomes muddy during the rainy season and this makes it
difficult to reach to the disposal site so the waste is dumped on the road side. It is desirable to
establish a system that can be managed properly by integrating these disposal sites.
b. Improvement of Organization and Legislation
b.1 Strengthening Finance on Solid Waste Management

The financial condition of the Kataragama PS is relatively good because it is rich in tourism
resources. However, the budget allocated for waste management is limited and is only sufficient
to maintain the current situation. Improvement of the waste collection rate and of the disposal
site is urgent issues, as mentioned above. Therefore, the financial situation needs to be improved
to enable sufficient allocation of budget for solid waste management.
68
4.2 Thamankaduwa Pradeshiya Sabha in North-Central Province
4.2.1 Outline of the Local Authority
In earlier times, the surrounding areas of the Thamankaduwa Pradeshiya Sabha (PS) flourished
as the second largest city in Sri Lanka. However, the area was looted once and relinquished to
invaders for a while. In 1948, Mr. D.S. Senanayake carried out a resettlement program for
farmers.
The area was historically called “Vijithagama” and renamed “Thamankaduwa Disawa” in 1815.
In 1953, it became the administrative district Polonnaruwa. During the early period of the
Polonnaruwa District, it had two revenue divisions: Sinhala Paththuwa and Thamankaduwa. In
1924, an election system was introduced in accordance with a resolution by the Village Council.
After the abolishment of the village council system in 1980, a new council system was
introduced for administration of this local authority. Under the new system, the Polonnaruwa
District was divided into five areas in 1983 and Thamankaduwa PS was established based on a
small town named Thamankaduwa. The administrative borders of Thamankaduwa PS were
settled in 1987. The first election for the village council was organized in 1991 and 14 members
were elected as council members.
The land along Mahawelli River, which flows through the territory of the PS, is considered
suitable for agriculture. The Thamankaduwa PS consists of 53 Grama Nilathari Divisions (GN
divisions), the smallest administrative unit. The dynamics of the population in the local
authority for the years 2013 to 2015 is shown in the table below.
Table 4-18: Dynamics of Population in Thamankaduwa PS (2012 to 2015)
Years 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population 82,426 83,034 84,047 84,869
Source: Estimated based on the census data of 2012
4.2.2 Current Situation and Problems of Solid Waste Management
The Thamankaduwa PS implements solid waste management (SWM) activities based on the
Pradeshiya Sabha Act of 1987.
a.2 Organization
The Thamankaduwa PS administration consists of nine sections including the Accounting
section, Development section and Works section. The Health section is in charge of SWM
activities.
SWM in the PS is implemented by two officers: a public health inspector (PHI) and a technical
officer (TO). However, the Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Education is responsible
for positioning dust bins in archaeological areas of Thamankaduwa for separated waste.
The organization charts of the Thamankaduwa PS and SWM in the PS are as follows.
69
Figure 4-8: The organization chart of the Thamankaduwa PS
Figure 4-9: The organization chart of SWM in Thamankaduwa PS

Table 4-19: Staff related to SWM in Thamankaduwa PS
Engineer 0
Technical officer (TO) 2 One of the TOs is in charge of SWM
Medical officer of health (MOH) 0
Public health inspector (PHI) 1
Supervisor (SV) 2 One of the two posts has been vacant.
Collection workers
Permanent 33
Temporary 2
Driver
Permanent 4
Temporary -
Disposal site workers 4
Other 1 Development Officer
70

The Thamankaduwa PS has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM.

As SWM in Thamankaduwa is implemented by a PHI and a TO, the number of staff is
insufficient for SWM on a pradeshiya sabha-scale.
b. Technical System

The Thamankaduwa PS collects organic and inorganic waste separately by implementing
separate collection service. The degree of cooperation by the residents on waste separation and
separate discharge was estimated as 75% (based on results of the interview surveys with PS
officials).
b.2 Collection and Transportation

The PS is obliged to collect waste discharged by each generation source in its territory and
transport the collected waste to the disposal site. Waste collection services are conducted
separately for town areas (areas along main roads and commercial zones) and residential areas.
Center of the Thamankaduwa

PS
Figure 4-10: Map of the Thamankaduwa PS

The Thamankaduwa PS conducts waste collection services with four tractors and 35 workers
(two of them are temporary workers). The PS is planning to purchase a compactor truck in the
near future.
71
Table 4-20: Collection equipment of the Thamankaduwa PS

Vehicle type Number Remarks
Compactor truck (12-14 m3) (1) To be purchased
Tractor 4
Hand-cart 3
Vacuum truck 1
Tipper (8.5m3) 1
As for the collection methods, door-to-door collection is implemented in the residential areas
while waste in the downtown, the areas located along main roads, is collected through
kerbside-collections. As for archaeological areas and the surroundings of an artificial lake,
dustbins for three types of separated waste – organic, polyethylene and papers – have to be
placed in accordance with regulations. The Ministry of Education is responsible for placing the
dustbins and collection of waste in these areas.
Waste collection fees are collected from 52 large-scale businesses including factories, but not
from residents. The average amount of waste fees to be collected from these businesses is 1,000
LKR per collection. The collection frequency is compiled in the table below.
Table 4-21: Waste collection frequency
Area Frequency Remarks
Commercial areas in the downtown Daily Two shifts: day and night shifts
Residential areas Once a week
Archaeological areas and surroundings of the
Twice a week
artificial lake
Waste for the entire town is collected by tractors. Trailers are divided for collecting separated
organic and inorganic waste.
Photo: Waste collection manner in the Thamankaduwa PS
The Thamankaduwa PS does not have a workshop; and therefore, equipment maintenance and
repairs are conducted at a private garage. Maintenance costs that exceed 5,000 LKR must be
approved by the mechanical engineer while those below 5,000 LKR are expended with the
approval of the secretary.

Inorganic waste collected and transported through separate collections is sorted into soft plastics,
hard plastics, glass and PET bottles at the recycling center located in the territory of the disposal
site. Other types of recyclables are collected by private recyclers at generation sources.
72
Table 4-22: Intermediate treatment facility in the Thamankaduwa PS

Capacity Established
Facility Type Execution body Address Remarks
(m3/day) year
Located in the
Thamankaduwa Sorts plastics and
Recycling facility territory of the 72 2015
PS PET bottles
disposal site
Photo: The recycling center (left) and sorted plastic materials (right)
Although there is a compost plant in the premises of the disposal site, it has essentially not been
in operation. As wild elephants come to the site searching for food, the organic waste is stored
in a storage tank of an obsolete gas collection facility immediately after its transportation to the
disposal site. After the waste has decomposed, the organic waste is put out of the storage tank
and discharged to the disposal site.
b.4 Final Disposal

The Thamankaduwa PS transports collected waste to a disposal site located at a distance of four
km from the downtown. As sufficient area is secured for the disposal site, lifetime-related
problems are not expected.
However, the most serious problem with the disposal site is that related with wild elephants. As
the elephants come to the site searching for food, there are risks of elephant attacks on drivers
and collection workers. In relation to this problem, the Thamankaduwa PS dug trenches and
erected electric fences as protection measures around the site. However, the elephants continue
breaking through these measures and accessing the site.
Accidents resulting in the death of elephants from eating plastic bags has been one of the
national problems recently.
73
Conditions of the disposal site
Trench for prevention of elephant access Manner of chasing elephants by

firecrackers and blank shots (shotgun)
The electric fence broken by elephants An elephant searching for food at the
disposal site
Photo: The final disposal site of the Thamankaduwa PS
74
Disposal Site
Central part of the

Thamankaduwa PS
Source: Results of interview surveys with Thamankaduwa officials
Figure 4-11: Location of the disposal site
Table 4-23: Detailed information about the disposal site of the Thamankaduwa PS
Site name Gallalla Disposal Site
1) Address Gallalla
2) Coordination E81°3′19.2 N7°54′14.8
3) Method of operation Open-dumping
Year
4) Disposal
2015
amount
(Average of August 15.3
(t/day)
to November)
5) Expected remain of life
More than 10 years
span (years) in 2015
6) Executing organization of Thamankaduwa PS
final disposal site
7) Tipping fee (LKR/ton) None

8) Unit cost of operation
380 LKR/t
(LKR/t) in 2014
9) Disposal area (ha) 1.6 ha
10) Environmental License
and Environmental None
Clearance
75
Figure 4-12: A satellite image of the disposal site
b.5 Issues of the final disposal site

The most serious problem with the final disposal site is access by wild elephants in spite of
preventive measures (building fences and trenches, etc), taken by the pradeshiya sabha. Thus,
one of the issues facing the Thamankaduwa PS is the time and cost required for restoration of
the broken electric fences and the trenches.

Separate collection services are implemented for organic and inorganic waste.
c.2 Composting
Although a compost plant has been constructed in the premises of the disposal site, the plant has
not been utilized. In addition to this, home composting is not conducted.
c.3 Recycling of Valuable Materials

Besides the recycling center operated by the Thamankaduwa PS, there are seven private
recycling facilities in the territory of the pradeshiya sabha.
The private recyclers collect recyclables on their own in the city and trade them with the
following prices.
Table 4-24: Recyclable trading prices at private recycling facilities
Types of recyclables Purchasing price (LKR/kg)
Plastics 25
Glass bottles 13 to 15 per bottle
Metals 28
Coconuts 5
Based on interviews with recyclers
76

The business environment is not so favourable for the recycling centers due to limited markets
and imports of cheap recyclables from India and China.
d. Public Awareness
d.1 Degree of Cooperation by Residents

The degree of residents’ cooperation on separate collection is relatively high (75%).

Awareness raising activities are implemented at schools and during visits to households and
businesses by the SV and the PHI who are in charge of SWM in the pradeshiya sabha.

Although the degree of residents’ cooperation on separate discharge is relatively high under the
current separate discharge system, it is necessary to conduct awareness raising activities to
maintain the residents’ cooperation if waste is separated into more categories in the future.
e. Finance
e.1 Financial Condition of the Local Authority

The difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the Thamankaduwa pradeshiya
sabha has been positive from 2012 to 2014 and its share in total annual revenues accounted for
56% on average as shown in the table below..
Table 4-25: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Thamankaduwa PS (Unit: Thousand
LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
1,000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 95,948 99,759 102,974 99,560
2 Actual
Revenue 86,718 94,361 96,566 92,548 100.0%
Grant 42,856 45,794 46,215 44,955 48.6%
Expenditure 39,486 38,514 44,118 40,706 44.0%
Recurrent 35,086 38,483 44,098 39,222 42.4%
Capital 4,400 31 20 1,484 1.6%
Profit or loss 47,232 55,847 52,448 51,842 56.0%
Source) Thamankaduwa PS ”Programme Budget：2013-2015”
The share of own-source revenues is roughly 51.4% while that of grants was estimated as
roughly 48.6% as shown in the table below.
77
Table 4-26: Breakdown of Annual Revenue ofThamankaduwa PS (Unit: thousand LKR)

Annual Average
No Types of Revenues 2012 2013 2014 1,000
%
LKR
1 Own-Source Revenues:
Rates & Taxes 5,708 6,546 7,943 6,732 7.3%
Rents 12,126 13,064 16,272 13,821 14.9%
License 3,623 5,878 5,949 5,150 5.6%
Fees For services 4,970 6,945 7,215 6,377 6.9%
Warrant Costs And Fines 7,946 9,938 9,517 9,134 9.9%
Other Income 9,489 6,196 3,455 6,380 6.9%
Total Own-Source Revenues 43,862 48,567 50,351 47,593 51.4%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 42,817 45,756 46,175 44,916 48.5%
Salaries 40,527 44,579 45,007 43,371 46.9%
Council Members Allowances 1,148 1,146 1,148 1,147 1.2%
Other Recurrent Grant 1,142 31 20 398 0.4%
Capital Grants 39 38 40 39 0.0%
Total Grants 42,856 45,794 46,215 44,955 48.6%
Total 86,718 94,361 96,566 92,548 100.0%
Source: Thamaknaduwa PS “Programme Budget：2013-2015”
The share of capital grants in the total revenues is accounting for around 3.6%. On the
other hand, the amount of total recurrent expenditures occupies 96.4% in the total
expenditures of the pradeshiya sabha.
Table 4-27: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Thamankaduwa PS (Unit:
Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 671 436 479 529 1.3%
Repairs And Maintenance Of Capital Assets 4,850 3,236 4,017 4,034 9.9%
Transportation, Communication, Utility 3,110 3,150 3,580 3,280 8.1%
And Others Rervices
Interest 97 93 86 92 0.2%
Grants, Subsidies And Contributions 487 312 345 381 0.9%
Pensions, Retirements, Benefits And 78 73 84 78 0.2%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures
2 Capital Expenditure 4,400 31 20 1,484 3.6%
Source : Thmankaduwa PS “Programme Budget：2013～2015”
e.2 SWM Finance

In the Thamankaduwa PS, all resources of the Health Section are utilized for implementing all
activities undertaken by the section. Therefore, it is difficult to separate SWM expenses from
those of other activities that the section implements.
The total revenue of the Health Section mainly consists of waste collection fee from business
institute and it is approximately 8,551,000 LKR (2014), while the expenditure is 29,172,000
LKR (2014). The table below shows the financial data of the Health Section from 2012 to 2014.
78
Table 4-28: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Health Section (Unit: Thousand LKR)
No Types of Expenses 2012* 2013 2014
B Revenues:
Total Revenues 8,511
1 Personal Emoluments 14,250
2 Total Supplies and Materials Expenses 5,769
3 Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 603
4 Fuel And Lubricants 5,150
5 Other supplies 2,850
Other Expenses 550
Total Expenditures 29,172
Source :Thamankaduwa PS, No data of 2012 and 2013
e.3 Cost of Waste Collection Service

The expenses of waste collection and transportation for the years 2012 to 2015 were as follows
Table 4-29: Waste collection and transportation costs
Cost
Item
(1000LKR/year)
1 Pay 10,192
2 Fuel 2,515
3 Maintenance 288
Total 12,996
12,996,000LKR/14.7 ton/day/365day 2,422(LKR/ton)
The unit collection and transportation cost was estimated as 2,422 LKR/ton from the data of
2015.
e.4 Operation Cost of Disposal Site

The waste disposal expenses for the past four years from 2012 to 2015 were shown in the table
below.
Table 4-30: Waste disposal costs
Cost
Item
(1000LKR/year)
1 Pay 1,852
2 Fuel 119
3 Maintenance 355
Total 2,326
2,326,000LKR/15.3 ton/day/365day 416(LKR/ton)
The unit disposal cost was estimated as 416 LKR/ton from the data of 2015.
e.5 Issues of Financial System

Total SWM expenses accounted for 7% of the total expenditures of the Thamankaduwa PS in
2014. Considering the SWM financial data, the amount of total expenditures exceeded that of
revenues to a small extent. In order to ensure profitability, the pradeshiya sabha needs to
optimize waste fees to be collected from large-scale businesses.
4.2.3 Waste Amount and Composition
79
The waste generation amount is estimated based on the generation rates identified by the Waste
Amount and Composition Surveys (WACS) implemented in the Central and Southern Provinces
of Sri Lanka under SATREPS and the number of generation sources surveyed during this study
by a local consultant. The results showed the generation rate of the municipal solid waste
(MSW) was 1.038 kg/person/day.
Table 4-31: The generation amount of MSW in the Thamankaduwa PS
sources (ton/day)
Restaurants (small) 13.80 Kg/(restaurant) 223 3.08
Commercial Organic-shops (large) 11.50 Kg/(shop) 30 0.35
Non-organic shops
143 1.04
(large) 7.25 Kg/(shop)
Non-organic shops
1,742 3.31
(small) 1.90 Kg/(shop)
Hospitals 1,087.00 Kg/(hospital) 10 10.87
Institutions
Industries Domestic 6.00 Kg/(industry) 828 4.97
Total 88.11
The waste composition was estimated based on the results of the Waste Composition Survey
(WCS) conducted in this study. The share of organic waste that includes kitchen waste, grass
and wood occupies 70% while all other inorganic waste (papers, textiles, plastics, metals and
glass) occupies the remaining 30%.
Table 4-32: Waste composition of the Thamankaduwa PS
Category Shares
Kitchen waste 51.7%
Paper 16.1%
Textiles 2.7%
Grass & wood 15.6%
Soft Plastics 8.1%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
Metal 1.6%
Other 0.0%
Total 100.0%
80
4.2.4 Results of the Public Opinion Survey
The demographics of the surveyed households are as follows: 97% are Tamil and only 3 % are
Muslims. Data on the average number of people per household and monthly income is shown in
the table below.
High 28 4.4 61,500
Middle 71 4.3 35,451
Low 51 4.5 16,569
Business 28 4.4 61,500

Yes 83 55
No 67 45
Total 150 100
Figure 4-13: Availability of garbage collection service in the Thamankaduwa PS
 In the Thamankaduwa PS, only 55 % of surveyed households are provided with a

garbage collection service, of which only 68% stated they use this service. Only 35 %
of surveyed households are “very satisfied” with the present SWM services provision,
while 53 % are “somewhat satisfied”.
How is your garbage collected?
Other
Caring to 0%
collection
truck
32% Item No. of sample %
Placing Placing outside 70 47

outside Carrying to collection point 32 21
47%
Other 0 0
Caring to Total 150 100
collection
point
21%
Figure 4-14 Method of garbage discharge by residences in the Thamankaduwa PS area
81
 Households’ main methods of waste discharge are shown in above figure. The most
common methods are discharging it outside their premises for house to house collection
(47 %), carrying garbage to the collection truck (32%), and 21% of residences disposed
waste at designated disposal points.
 Only 6% of surveyed households receive a daily garbage collection service while 35 %
stated that they received the service once/week and 51% received the service 2-3
times/week. However, 64% discharge their garbage as soon as it is generated and 34 %
discharge their garbage daily, the gap between discharge and collection being slightly
greater for the residences far away from the city center. The discrepancy between these
figures explains the large amount of discarded garbage present on many streets around the
Thamankaduwa PS.
 In general, adult females handle waste in about 53 % of surveyed households.
 As shown in table below, 48 % of surveyed households practice source separation.
Additionally, 91 % of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or
someone who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials. Hence, an informal
separation recycling system is well established in the Thamankaduwa PS area.
Willingness to cooperate in separate garbage
collection system
No. of
Very much Item %
willing sample
Doing
already
35% Very much willing 53 35
48% Somewhat willing 9 6
Somewhat Less willing 6 4
willing
6%
Not willing 11 7
Doing already 71 48
Total 150 100
Not willing Less willing
7% 4%

collection system in the Thamankaduwa PS
 Only 23 % of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also used
the finished compost for their own garden.
 Only 31% of households have ever discussed proper garbage discharge methods at the
community level.
 96 % of households stated that SWM awareness programmes are very necessary while the
other 4 % stated “somewhat necessary”.
 The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is 56 ± 76 Rs/month
per household. However, 49 % of households do not like to pay for SWM services.
 Out of all surveyed households, 24 % stated that they sell/give away metal for recycling
and 12 % of residences sell/give-away tins and cans for recycling. Glass and bottle
recycling is practiced by 26 % of households while plastic recycling is practiced by 8 %.
The percentage of households involved in paper recycling was low (11 %).
4.2.5 Waste Flow
The current waste flow in the pradeshiya sabha was identified based on the results of the public
opinion survey, the survey on waste generation sources, the review of statistical data and the
survey conducted by a local consultant.
82
1. Waste generation
88.2 t/d
(100.0%)

15.0 t/d 0.7 t/d
(17.0%) (0.7%)
8.2 t/d 0.3 t/d
(9.3%) (0.3%)
33.0 t/d 14.7 t/d
(37.4%) (16.6%)
9. Recycling (1)
0.1 t/d
(0.1%)
31.3 t/d 15.3 t/d
(35.5%) (17.3%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
12. Final disposal
15.3 t/d
(17.3%)
Figure 4-16: Current waste flow in the Thamankaduwa PS (2015)
According to the waste flow, the waste collection rate is very low (17.8%=[Discharged
amount+Direct transportation]/Generation amount). The shares of self disposal at generation
sources such as burning and burying waste, illegal dumping and recyclable collection are 41.2%,
31.3% and 0.4% in the total generation amount respectively.

Industrial waste is not generated in the Thamankaduwa pradeshiya sabha territory.
b.1 Generation and Disposal Amounts

The hospital of the Thamankaduwa PS transports its hazardous or infectious waste to Colombo
itself. Only general waste of the hospital is collected by the pradeshiya sabha.
b.2 Collection, Transportation, Treatment and Disposal

As there are occasions that a small amount of hazardous or infectious waste is mixed with the
general waste collected from the hospital, the pradeshiya sabha incinerates this waste at the
disposal site whenever identified.
b.3 Collection and Transportation Costs
83
20,000 LKR/month is collected from the hospital as a waste fee for collection of general waste.
c.1 Collection, Transportation, Treatment and Disposal

The Thamankaduwa PS used to discharge night soil in the forest near the PS. Presently, the PS
has been storing night soil collected in its territory. However, no treatment is conducted on the
collected night soil. As the storing capacity of the night soil storage yard is limited, it is
impossible for the PS to collect all night soil generated in its territory.
c.2 Collection and Treatment Costs

No fees are collected for night soil collection.
4.2.7 Solid Waste Management Improvement Needs
a.1 Disposal Site Improvement Measures

The issue related with wild elephants is not only a problem related with SWM, but also a
problem related to the residents’ safety and is unique to Sri Lanka. Although the problem should
be addressed by the entire nation, the Thamankaduwa pradeshiya sabha should take preventive
actions such as strengthening the current protection fences and trenches and/or establishing
elephant feeding points in different places from the viewpoint of SWM.
a.2 Improvement of Waste Collection Rate

According to the interview results, the coverage of waste collection services in the
Thamankaduwa PS is 12% in terms of area (55 km2/268 km2) and 48% in terms of population
(42,100 people/96,800 people). However, the waste collection rate is only 18% based on the
waste flow. The main reasons for the low rate are that (1) the pradeshiya sabha has a wide
territory and does not conduct collection services in low-populated areas, and (2) the number of
vehicles and collection workers are not sufficient for implementing collection services in all
areas of the pradeshiya sabha.
The Thamankaduwa pradeshiya sabha is required to improve the service coverage by increasing
the number of collection equipment.
a.3 Enhancement of 3Rs / Public awareness activity

Thamankaduwa PS has started the operation of small scale compost plant and material recovery
facility. The separation of organic waste and valuable waste at generation source is important to
manage the intermediate treatment facility. Hence, the enhancement of 3Rs and public
awareness activity is essential for Thamankaduwa PS.
84
4.3 Jaffna Municipal Council in Northern Province
4.3.1 Outline of the LA
The Jaffna Municipal Council (MC), which is located on the Jaffna peninsula, is situated in
northern Sri Lanka. It is the capital city of the Northern Province and is the core of politics,
economy and culture. The climate of the Jaffna MC belongs to a “dry zone” and in particular,
the minor islands area is extremely dry. The rainy season is from October to December during
the Northern East monsoon season and there is some rain in April and May. (Source:
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, the project for development planning for the rapid
promotion of reconstruction and development in Jaffna District final report JICA, November
2011)
Although the annual economic growth rate of Sri Lanka had dropped off to 3.5% in 2009 due to
worldwide economic stagnation and the prolonged ethnic violence since the 1980’s, it recovered
to 7.4% in 2014 after the end of ethnic violence. Consequently, the annual GDP per capita
reached 3,625 USD in 2014 and Sri Lanka has now reached the lower position of a
middle-income country30. In spite of a nation-wide economic recovery in Sri Lanka, there are
economic disparities between its nine provinces. The annual economic growth rate in the
Northern Province from 2011 to 2012 reached 25.9%; however the development in the Northern
Province is still insufficient and this causes the GDP of the Northern Province to occupy
approximately 4.0% of the total Sri Lanka GDP31.
The Jaffna MC consists of 47 Grama Nilathari Divisions (GN divisions), which are minimum
administrative units and 23 Wards. The population of Jaffna MC between 2010 and 2015 is
shown in the following table.
Table 4-34: Population Trend of Jaffna MC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015(9月)
Population 87,995 91,309 89,655 89,887 90,559 91,100
Source: Jaffna district secretariat and Nallur district secretariat
The returning of Internal Displaced People from the Jaffna MC to their hometowns caused a
reduction of the population from 2011 to 2012.

The Five-Year Investment Programme: The Northern Provincial Council (2009-2013) planned
by the Northern Provincial government, appropriated the budget for solid waste management of
local authorities to promote community development. However, the Five-Year Investment
Programme has not been updated (or renewed) since the previous programme finished at the end
of 2013.
PHYSICAL PLAN FOR THE NORTHERN PROVINCE Volume One: The Plan Ministry of
Construction, Engineering Services, Housing & common Amenities (Draft December 2012)
which looks from the viewpoint of preventing environmental deterioration through future
economic growth, proposes reviewing the recycling method of solid waste and public awareness
activities.
30
Japan Ministry of foreign affairs: http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/srilanka/data.html, October 2015
31
p 49 Sri Lanka Socio Economic Data 2014, Central Bank of Sri Lanka , June 2014
85

The Jaffna MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM.
a.3 Organization
The collection of municipal solid waste, sweeping of streets and public areas, operation of
intermediate treatment facilities such as compost plants, and operation of landfill sites are
carried out by the Public Health Engineering Division (PHED) under the Medical Officer of
Health (MOH) department in Jaffna. As for the maintenance of collection vehicles and
assembling of public waste bins, these activities are carried out through workshops under the
Engineer Department. The main duties of the PHED—the organization in charge of waste
disposal—is as follows:
 Public health activities (prevention of communicable diseases such as dengue fever)
 Road sweeping
 Fee-based waste collection service
 Operation of compost plant, promotion of waste separation and operation of final disposal
site
The senior supervisor belonging to the PHDE is the person in charge of solid waste
management, while the Public Health Inspector (PHI) belonging to the Food and Drug Division
is mainly in charge of public awareness activities on solid waste. Two Municipal Engineers in
the Works Engineering Department are in charge of the technical aspect of solid waste
management; however, both positions are vacant as of October 2015.
The organization chart and staff related to solid waste management of Jaffna MC is shown
below.
Figure 4-17: Organizational chart of the Jaffna MC
86
Table 4-35: Staff related to SWM in the Jaffna MC

Engineers 2 Vacant
TO(Technical Officer) 12
MOH(Medical officer of health) 3 Out sourcing
PHIs(Public health inspector) 12
SV(Supervisor) 30
Senior supervisor for 7ZONEs (7)
Supervisor for wards (23)
Supervisor's Helpers/ 'kangani' 15
Temporary 118
Drivers Permanent 23
Temporary 7
Other (Compost yard) 6
Total

Since The Jaffna MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM, the
solid waste management is not systematically implemented. Although the number of Engineer
to be assigned is two, however there is no Engineers at the Jaffna MC. The engineering support
to solid waste management becomes insufficient due to lack of Engineer.
b. Technical System
In the Jaffna MC, the kerbside collection system with waste bins and the stationed collection
system for mixed waste have been implemented thus far. Mixed waste from residents, which is
stored in the waste collection bins, is discharged on the curb and collected by collection vehicles.
Large amounts of waste generated by large shops and large restaurants, etc., are stored in 100
litre or 200 litre barrels and are collected door to door by collection vehicle.
Photo：Waste storage barrels for large waste generators in Jaffna MC

The collection and transferring of municipal solid waste is carried out by the Jaffna MC. The
frequency of kerbside collection and stationed collection is approximately two times a week and
the door to door collection of large amounts of waste is daily. The garden waste is collected for
an additional charge when the residents request it to be collected.
87
Table 4-36: Waste collection charge in the Jaffna MC

Types of waste collection Cost (LKR)
 Kerbside collection and stationed collection in residential area Free
 Collection of large amounts of
200 litre barrel 230
waste
100 litre barrel 150
 Garden waste (1 load of tractor) 575
The waste discharged in narrow road areas where collection vehicles cannot pass is collected by
handcarts (0.7m3). The rate of waste collection coverage in the administrative area is
approximately 80%, while the non-coverage area — where residents dispose of the waste
themselves — is approximately 20%.
The drivers of collection vehicles consist of 23 permanent and seven casual (temporary) drivers
with the PHD. The collection vehicles consist of four compactor trucks (three of them are under
repair), 18 tractors (eight of them are under repair) and 12 rental tractors from a private
company. The rental charge of tractors is 1,500LKR per load at the final disposal site. The
running mileage and collection area of each collection vehicle is recorded as a working record.
The collection vehicles and tractors are maintained at the workshop at the same premises of the
Jaffna MC office.
Photo：Waste collection by handcart (0.7m3) and maintenance workshop
b.3 Intermediate treatment

The compost plant and sorting yard of recyclable materials are operated by the Jaffna MC. The
details are described in the following table.
Table 4-37: Intermediate treatment facility in the Jaffna MC
Waste amount
Intermediate Execution Address received Establish Remarks
treatment body ment
(ton/week)
Compost plant Kakkaith 9-10 2002 Produced roughly
ivu, 200kg/week of compost
Jaffna Araly
Sorting yard of MC Under Polyethylene, plastic, PET
Rd, 2015
recyclable material Jaffna construction bottle
Source: Jaffna MC senior supervisor
The compost plant receives between six to seven loads of garden waste and produces
approximately 200kg of compost in a week with eight workers. Due to the lack of workers, the
compost plant does not function at its full capacity. The selling price of compost is 6.0LKR/kg.
The sorting yard for recyclable waste funded by the Pilisaru project is under construction at the
same premises of the compost plant. The crushing machine (of plastics) will be installed after
construction.
88
Photo：Compost plant and crushing machine of plastic
b.4 Final disposal

The municipal waste collected by the Jaffna MC is disposed at the Kallundai disposal site
nearby the abandoned salt field in Valikamam-South West PS. The Kallundai disposal site has
been in operation since 2002 and is shared by the Jaffna MC, Valikamam-South West PS and
Nallur PS.
The operation of the Kallundai disposal site, such as recording of collection vehicle data and
moving of disposed waste by heavy machinery is conducted by the PHDE and the Engineering
Works department of the Jaffna MC. The disposal amount at the disposal site is 113.1 ton/day
(Jaffna 102.2 ton/day, Valikamam-South West PS:3.1 ton/day, Nallur PS: 7.8 ton/day)
according to the records at the gate.
The area of the current disposal site is approximately 10 hectares, and the site has not been
officially approved for use as a disposal site by the three LAs since 2002. Consequently, the
Northern Provincial Land commissioner requested the Land commissioner General to lease
20.813 hectares including the current 10 hectares and another future 10.813 hectares as a long
term contract according to the request from the Jaffna MC in June 2013. However, a long-term
lease has not been approved by the central Land commissioner General as of October 2015.
The location of incoming waste from the three local authorities to the Kallundai disposal site
and other details are provided in the following figure and table.
Table 4-38 Detail of Kallundai disposal site
Site name Kallundai disposal site
11) Address No. 02 under the plan number of PPYa 2390 at Kallundai, Navali South GN division
12) Coordination E79°58′31.9 N9°41′52.9
13) Method of operation Open dumping (with control gate)
14) Dispo Year Jaffna MC Valikamum-SW PS Nallur PS Total
sal
2015 102.2
amount 3.1 7.8 113.1
(Average. Apr-Sept) (70.5-131.5)
(t/day)
15) Expected remaining life
5
span (years) in 2015
16) Executing organization
Jaffna MC
of final disposal site
17) Tipping fee (LKR/ton) 450

92
(LKR/t) in 2015
Current: approximately10 ha Future: 10.813 ha
19) Disposal area (ha)
Total: 20.813 ha
Clearance
Source: Jaffna MC
89
Valikamam-S.W. PS
Nallur PS
Kallundai
Disposal site
Kakkaithivu
Compost plant
Sorting yard
Jaffna MC
Figure 4-18: location of incoming waste from three local authorities to the Kallundai
disposal site
Figure 4-19: Satellite image of Kallundai disposal site
b.5 Issue of Technical system

Due to the insufficient number of waste collection workers and malfunction of collection
vehicles, the Jaffna MC does not properly collect the waste and this causes sanitary and
environmental issues in the town.
An insufficient budget and lack of knowledge of proper operation of the disposal site has caused
serious environmental issues to the surrounding area.
90
Photo: Scattered illegally discharged waste

Although the Jaffna MC has conducted the source separation and separate collection with a
designated tractor (over the course of a week) through a public awareness programme at Bazar
DN, there is no programme or activities as source separation organized by the Jaffna MC at
other areas. The households usually separate the bottles, papers, metals, plastics and so on at the
generation source and then sell it to private recycling shop(s). The total amount of recyclable
waste separated at households in the Jaffna MC town reaches approximately 200kg/day.

There are no organic waste reduction programmes or activities organized by the Jaffna MC.

There are two Recyclable Waste Operation Shops in Jaffna town and the shops buy plastic, cans,
metal and others materials. The total amount of buying valuable material at the two shops is
approximately 10,000kg/month and the price of each valuable material is described in the
following table.
Table 4-39: the price of each valuable material
Valuable material Buying price (LKR/kg)
Plastic 35
Can 35
Polyethylene 10
Plastic chair 80
Becket 50
Source: Recyclable waste Operation shop
Photo: Recyclable Waste Operation Shop
91

Since the source separation and separate collection are not officially conducted by the Jaffna
MC — excluding the Bazar area — citizens separate and sell valuable materials to private
recycling shops by themselves. The buying price of valuable materials to private recycling
shops is always affected by the international market price and it is not always stable.
d. Public Awareness

The Jaffna MC has conducted source separation and separate collection with a designated
tractor (over the course of a week) as a public awareness programme at the Bazar area. The
Jaffna MC supports schools and citizen groups to disseminate the source separation and separate
collection with waste separate bins. Moreover, the Jaffna MC distributed leaflets to all
households in the Jaffna MC to cooperate in carrying out the separate collection from June to
August 2015.
Photo: Waste Separate Bin

Although the Jaffna MC has conducted source separation and separate collection as a public
awareness programme in the Bazar area, the rate of dissemination of the programme (namely
the waste separation rate) is low due to insufficient human resources, knowledge, educational
materials and so on.
e. Finance
e.1 Financial Condition of Municipal Council

The difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the Jaffna Municipal Council has
been positive from 2012 to 2014 and its share in total annual revenues accounted for 7.7% on
average as shown in the table below.
92
Table 4-40: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Jaffna MC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
1,000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 71,622 79,156 85,748 78,842
2 Actual
Revenue 527,611 752,720 731,428 670,586 100.0%
Grant 396,761 540,164 386,271 441,065 65.8%
Expenditure 527,514 697,258 631,391 618,721 92.3%
Recurrent 449,392 691,096 525,700 555,396 82.8%
Capital 78,122 6,162 105,691 63,325 9.4%
Profit or loss 97 55,462 100,037 51,865 7.7%
Source: Jaffna MC, “Programme Budget：2013-2015”
roughly 69.2 % as shown in the table below.
Table 4-41: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Jaffna MC (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
%
LKR
Rates & Taxes 21,200 21,403 56,920 33,174 5.2%
Rents 39,420 64,270 59,952 54,547 8.6%
License 9,730 12,909 13,005 11,881 1.9%
Other Income 32,728 85,635 75,035 64,466 10.1%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 347,001 514,164 350,551
Salaries 344,913 512,076 348,463 401,817 63.1%
Other Recurrent Grant
Capital Grants 49,760 26,000 35,720 37,160 5.8%
Total Grants 396,761 540,164 386,271 441,065 69.2%
Total 527,611 752,719 631,418 637,249 100.0%
Source:Jaffna MC,”Programme Budget:2013-2015”
expenditures of the pradeshiya sabha.
93
Table 4-42: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Jaffna MC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 2,138 2,150 3,583 2,624 0.4%
And Others Rervices
Interest 1,061 2,000 2,008 1,690 0.3%
Grants, Subsidies And Contributions 1219 1,700 3,420 2,113 0.3%
Pensions, Retirements, Benefits And 7,512 15,000 11,110 11,207 1.8%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures 0.0%
e.2 SWM Finance

The total revenue of Public Health Engineering Division mainly consists of the waste collection
fee from business institute. It is approximately 22,722,000 LKR (2012) and 29,728,000 (2013),
while the expenditure is 95,250,000 LKR (2012) and 178,189,000LKR (2013). The table below
shows the financial data of Public Health Engineering Division from 2012 to 2014.
Table 4-43: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Public Health Engineering Division of
Jaffna MC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
B Revenues: 22,722 29,782 29,212
Personal Emoluments 83,976 144,146 118,057
Supplies And Material Expenditures: 5,302 15,582 10,350
Equipment For Disposing Garbage 308 4,899 404
Fuel And Lubricants 4,522 9,073 8,294
Uniforms for Workers 340 1,249 1,432
Awareness Program 98 107 149
Other supplies 34 254 71
Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 1,458 4,030 4,353
Final Disposal Payment 2,128 5,532 7,369
Other Expenses 4,386 8,899 2,780
Total expenditure 97,250 178,189 142,909
e.3 Cost of waste collection

Collection of municipal solid waste is executed by the Jaffna MC and the cost of waste
collection is 4,771 LKR/tons (2015). The breakdown is as follows:
94
Table 4-44: Total cost of waste collection of Jaffna MC (2015)

Items Cost (1000LKR/year)
1 Personal emoluments 162,012
2 Fuel 6,000
3 Mechanical & Electrical Goods 50
4 Medical supplies 800
5 Uniform 1,300
6 Nallur festival 700
7 Buckets, basket 1,200
8 Repairs vehicles 2,200
9 Maintenance 800
10 Employee provident fund, trust fund 2,912
Total 177,974
177,974LKR/collection amount 102.2 ton/day/365day= 4,771(LKR/ton)
e.4 Operation cost of disposal site

The tipping fee at the disposal site is 450 LKR /load and this adds up in the general account
budget. The operation cost of disposal sites consist of rental charge(s) of heavy machinery and
the salary for security, which leads to an average 197 LKR per ton of waste.
Table 4-45: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Jaffna MC (2015)
Cost
Items
(1000LKR/year)
1 Salary of security (1,200LKR x 2persons x 30daysx12months) 864
2 Rental charge of heavy machinery 900
3 Others 5,360
Total 7,369
7,369,000LKR/102.2 ton/day/365day 197 (LKR/ton)
e.5 Issues of SWM financial system

The majority of the capital expenditures are financed from the own-source revenues of the
Municipal council or external funds. And there is no linkage between revenue from large waste
collection and expenditure of SWM. Although LAs considers the balance sheet between
revenue and expenditure totally, the sustainability of SMW is not considered well. For instance,
the operation cost of final disposal site is 42LKR/ton and it seems not to be sustainable for
proper operation of landfill site.

The waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate obtained by the
University of Peradeniya “Feasibility Assessment of Plastic Recycling Center Establishment in
Akkarapattu Municipal Council Area” in August 2015. The results reveal the municipal waste
generation amount is 104.87 tons/day and the waste generation rate is 1,297g/person/day.
95
Table 4-46: Waste Generation Amount of Jaffna MC

Generation Generation Generation
Source unit
rate sources (ton/day)
Commercial
Non-organic shops (small) 17.58 Kg/(shop) 1,285 22.59
Hospitals 5.25 Kg/(hospital) 19 0.10
Institutions
Industries
Drainage ,1,000.00 Kg 1 1.00
Total 0 104.87
The results of the locally outsourced survey on waste composition which is considered animal
feeding of kitchen waste conducted from 20 to 26 October in Kallundai Disposal Site is shown
below.
Table 4-47: Waste Composition of the Jaffna MC
Category Rate (%)
1 Kitchen waste 68.9
2 Paper 2.7
3 Textiles 1.3
4 Grass & wood 15.1
5 Soft Plastics 3.6
6 Hard Plastics 0.4
7 Rubber & leather 0.2
8 Metal 0.3
9 Glass & bottles 0.4
10 Stone & ceramic 7.1
11 Other 0.0
Total 100.0
4.3.4 The results of the Public Opinion survey

99% of the surveyed households are Tamil and only 1% is Muslims. Data on the average
number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the Table below.
96
High 39 4.9 39,744
Middle 66 5.0 18,447
Low 61 4.6 7,782
Business 44 3.3 53,780

Yes 146 88
No 20 12
Total 166 100
Figure 4-20: Availability of garbage collection service in the Jaffna MC
 In the Jaffna MC, 88% of surveyed households are provided with a garbage collection
service, of which 82% stated they use this service. Only 26% of surveyed households are
“very satisfied” with the present SWM service provision, while 45% are “somewhat
satisfied”.
No. of
Item %
sample
Other 7 4
Total 166 100
Figure 4-21: Method of garbage discharge by residence in JMC area

 Households’ main methods of waste discharge are shown above Figure. The most common
methods are discharging it at placing outside (64%) and carrying garbage to the collection
truck (27%).
 Only 38% of surveyed households receive a daily garbage collection service while 13%
stated that they received the service less frequently than once a week. However, 73%
discharge their garbage as soon as it is generated and 22 % discharge their garbage daily; the
gap between discharge and collection is slightly greater for the low income group. The
97
discrepancy between these figures explains the large amount of discarded garbage present on
many streets around Jaffna.
 As shown in Figure-8, 30% of surveyed households are not willing to cooperate with source
separation for recycling. In addition, only 59% of surveyed households stated that there are
recyclable collectors or someone who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials.
Hence, an informal source separation recycling system is not well established in the Jaffna
MC area.
Willingness to cooperate in separate
garbage collection system
Doing Very much willing 46 28
already
Very much Somewhat willing 43 26
6%
willing Less willing 17 10
28%
Not willing Not willing 50 30
30% Doing already 10 6
Total 166 100
Less willing Somewhat
10% willing
26%
Figure 4-22: Willingness of residences to participate in a source separated garbage

collection system in Jaffna MC
 Only 8% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also use the
finished compost for their own garden.
 Not many surveyed households (64 %) have ever discussed proper garbage discharge
 57% of households stated that SWM awareness programmes are very necessary while 39%
stated “somewhat necessary”.
 The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is 207 ± 263 LKR/month
per household. However 19% of households do not like to pay for SWM services.
 Out of all surveyed households, 13% stated that they sell/give-away metal for recycling and
12% of residences sell/give-away tins & cans for recycling. Glass and bottle recycling is
only practiced by 8% of households while plastic recycling is 12%. The percentage of
households who are involved in paper recycling (selling or giving-away) was low (3%).
4.3.5 Waste flow

Current waste flow has been prepared by analysing the locally outsourced public opinion survey,
statistical data collection, and census results.
amount)/generation amount) is 80.7%. As for the recycling rate for the generation amount,
onsite compost is 5.9%, material recovery is 0.2%, and the total rate is 6.1%. On the other hand,
the final disposal rate for the generation amount has reached 96.6%, which has become a burden
on the Kallundai disposal site.
98
1. Waste generation
105.8 t/d
(100.0%)

82.5 t/d 2.8 t/d
(78.0%) (2.7%)
6.2 t/d 0.2 t/d
(5.9%) (0.2%)
13.5 t/d 82.3 t/d
(12.8%) (77.8%)
9. Recycling (1)
11 t/d
(10.2%)
0.8 t/d 102.2 t/d
(0.8%) (96.6%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
13. Visotor's waste 12. Final disposal
27.9 t/d 102.2 t/d
(26.4%) (96.6%)
Figure 4-23: Waste flow of the Jaffna MC (2015)

Although there is a marine products factory and ice cream factory, they do not discharge any
industrial waste or hazardous waste in the Jaffna MC.

The waste generation from hospitals mainly consist of municipal waste and the disposal amount
at the Kallundai disposal site is approximately 4.5 tons/day. The infectious waste (syringes, etc.)
is not collected nor taken to the disposal site since it is incinerated at the incinerator.
b.2 Collection/Transportation and Disposal

The Jaffna MC collects municipal waste from the hospitals and takes it to the Kallundai disposal
site.
b.3 Collection fee

The collection fee is the same as the fee of large waste generators; 230LKR/200 litre barrel and
150LKR/100 litre barrel.

The disposal amount of night soil at the Kallundai disposal site is approximately 11,000
litres/day, according to the records.
99
c.2 Collection/ Transportation and Disposal

Night soil is collected by collection vehicles operated by the Jaffna MC and the collected night
soil is disposed of at the Kallundai disposal site without any treatment.
c.3 Collection fee

The collection fee of night soil is 0.66Rs/litre for liquid only, while sludge is 1.30Rs/litre.
a.1 Rehabilitation of existing final disposal site and the establish of new final
disposal site
The collected waste has been discharged at Kallundai disposal site where is abandoned saltpan
for long time. The area of existing disposal site is approximately 10hectors, but the boundary
of the site is not clear and the discharged waste is scattered without any control such as access
road, covering soil and so on. Since the operation of existing disposal site seems to affect
environmental adverse impact to surrounding area, the rehabilitation of existing disposal site is
needed as soon as possible.
Jaffna MC plans to establish the new final disposal site next to existing disposal site which area
also approximately 10 hectors, however the construction and management of new final disposal
site face on the difficulty of construction and proper management. The proper technical and
budget support is needed. Since the new final disposal site is expected to be a role of regional
disposal site shared by several local authorities, the consensus to establish the proper
management system among stakeholders is important.
a.2 Improvement of discharging and collection

According to the waste flow, the waste collection rate is as low as 75.7%, but the waste
collection vehicles often become malfunction and it causes the difficulty of regular waste
collection service. The renewal of waste collection vehicles to enhance the capacity of waste
collection service is needed as the support.
a.3 Promotion of 3Rs

According to the result of WACS, the kitchen waste and garden waste occupy 84% of waste
generation in Jaffna MC and most of kitchen waste is feeded to stray cows in the town. Jaffna
MC is conducting the compost plant to deal with the garden waste and the material recovery
facility, however the handling amount is quite small due to lack of technical issue and
management issue.
a.4 Improvement of Organization and Legislation

Jaffna MC spends much budget and human resource to collect and discharge waste every day
without the long-term plan including organization and legislation. The formulation of master
plan of solid waste management is needed to improve and develop the future policy, legislation,
organization, and budgeting regarding on solid waste management.
100
4.4 Trincomalee Urban Council in Eastern Province
The Trincomalee Urban Council (UC) is located on Sri Lanka’s north-eastern coast. It is the
capital city of the Eastern Province and is the core of politics, economy and culture. The climate
of the Trincomalee UC is characterized by a “tropical summer low rainfall”. The dry season is
from February to September and the average annual precipitation is approximately 1,570mm.
The coolest average temperature in the year, 26 degrees Celsius, is in December and January,
while the hottest average temperature in the year, approximately 30 degrees Celsius, is from
April to September.
Prior to the ethnic conflict in the early eighties, the Eastern Provincial
contribution to the national GDP had been around 14%. However, with the
escalation of ethnic violence, the Eastern Provincial contribution has been
reduced to around 4.7% in 2005. After the ethnic conflict in 2009, the main industries of
agriculture, fisheries, construction and tourism have rapidly recovered. (Source: p75 Eastern
Development Plan 2011-2015, Eastern Provincial Council Trincomalee）
The Trincomalee UC consists of 17 Grama Nilathari Divisions (GN divisions). The population
of the Trincomalee UC between 2010 and 2015 is shown in the following table.
Table 4-49: Population Trend of Trincomalee UC (2010-2014)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Population 65,848 54,776 55,479 57,244 55,564
Source: Trincomalee district secretariat
The returning of Internal Displaced People from the Trincomalee UC to their hometowns
caused a reduction of the population from 2011 to 2012.

Eastern Development Plan 2011-2015, the Eastern Provincial Council Trincomalee formulated
by the Eastern Province strengthened the capacity of solid waste management with the “Sectoral
Development Plan” and appropriated the budget for introducing and disseminating good
practices, the construction of facilities and the procurement of equipment.

a.3 Organization
Solid waste management is carried out by the Works Division under the Civil Department and
the Health Division under the Health Department. The main duties of both organizations are as
follows:
 Waste collection and transportation services（Works Division）
 Public health activities (prevention of communicable diseases such as dengue fever)
101
 Road sweeping
 Fee-based waste collection service
 Operation of compost plant, promotion of waste separation and operation of final disposal
site
The technical officer with the Works Division is the person in charge of solid waste
management, while the Public Health Inspector (PHI) belonging to the Public Health division is
mainly in charge of public awareness activities on solid waste. The works division is in charge
of the maintenance of collection tractors and trailers, and the assembling the public waste bins.
The organization chart and staff related to solid waste management of the Trincomalee UC is
shown below.
COUNCIL
CHAIRMA
N Vice
Chairman
SECRETARY
Administration Finance Planning Civil Health
Accountant
A.O Ay. Doctor
Internal Audit
SW
C.M.A
Council Establishmen Library Record Revenu Stores Work Fire Brigade Ayurvedic Public
t Room Accounting Health
e
Assessment Collectio Music

n
D.O/M.A T.O OIC Compounder D.O/M.A
Translator H. Librarian DFO O.E.S P.H.I
L.G.A Mid wife
D.O/M.A D.O/M.A Librarian D.O/M.A D.O/M.A D.O/M.A D.O/M.A M.A D.O/M.A Fire officer
Libr. Ass Supervisor
R.I. Supervisor Driver Kankany
O.E.S Kankany Fireman Health Laborer
Driver
Mar. Sup H.E. Operator
Arachchi Rec.Roo O.E. O.E. O.E. O.E. Welder
Tele.Oper Binder O.E. Carpenter
Messenger O.E.S. Fitter (Water work)
O.E.S. Painter
Mechanic
Mason
Watcher
Tree Cutter
Water Meter
Reader
Figure 4-24: Organizational chart of Trincomalee UC
Table 4-50: Staff related to SWM in Trincomalee UC

Engineer -
TO(Technical Officer) 4 SWM:1
MOH(Medical officer of health) 1 Out sourcing
SV(Supervisor) 5
Temporary 8
Driver Permanent 12
Disposal site workers Permanent 1 Guard
Total 144
102

The Trincomalee MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM though
it should engage in SWM activities according to a 1947 municipal ordinance.
Since The Trincomalee UC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM,
the solid waste management is not systematically implemented.
b. Technical System
In the Trincomalee UC, the kerbside collection system with waste bins for mixed waste has
been implemented thus far. Mixed waste from residents, which is stored in the waste collection
bins, is discharged on the curb and collected by collection vehicles. Large amounts of waste
generated by hotels and hospitals, etc., are stored in 100 litre or 200 litre barrels and are
collected daily through door to door collection vehicle(s). The plastic barrels are put into the
market and communal area(s) and collected daily as well.
Photo：Waste storage barrels for large waste generators in Trincomalee UC

The collection and transferring of municipal solid waste is carried out by the Trincomalee UC.
The frequency of kerbside collection is once a week and the door to door collection of large
amounts of waste are daily. For instance, some large hotels discharge the five barrels (Total
500-700liter) and are charged 4,000LKR per month. The waste collection charge in the
Trincomalee UC is shown below.
Table 4-51: Waste collection charge in the Trincomalee UC
Types of waste collection Cost (LKR)
Kerbside collection Free
4,000LKR/month
3,000LKR/month
Collection of large amounts of waste 2,500LKR/month
2,000LKR/month
1,000LKR/month
The waste collection team consists of a driver for the collection tractor and 5-6 collection
workers, while the collection vehicles consist of four compactor trucks (one of them is under
repair), twelve tractors (six of them are under repair) and fifteen handcarts. The waste collected
by the handcarts are loaded onto the tractors at the transfer place at the market or on the
seashore and taken to the disposal site. The running mileage and collection area of each
collection vehicle is recorded as a working record
103
The collection vehicles and tractors are maintained at the workshop which has twelve staff,
three of whom are mechanics from nearby the Trincomalee UC office.
Photo：Waste collection by tractor and maintenance workshop

Although there are no intermediate treatment facilities such as a compost plant or a material
recovery facility being operated by the Trincomalee UC as of October 2015, a private recycling
company will start operations of a material recovery facility at the current disposal site
according to a memo of understanding between the Trincomalee UC and the private company.
Table 4-52: Intermediate treatment facility in Trincomalee UC
Intermediate Execution Waste amount Establishm

treatment body Address received ent Remarks
(ton/week)
CGL
Material recovery Internation Kanniya 2016 Cardboard,
Final N.A. plastic, metal
facility al Eco Pvt disposal site (planned) and so on
Ltd
Source: Trincomalee UC Secretory
b.4 Final disposal

The municipal waste collected by the Trincomalee UC is disposed at the Kanniya in a hilly
forest area in Trincomalee Town & Gravets PS. The Kanniya disposal site has been in operation
since 2005 and is shared by the Trincomalee UC and Trincomalee Town & Gravets PS as a
regional disposal site.
The operation of the Kanniya disposal site, such as recording of collection vehicle data and
moving of disposed waste by heavy machinery was conducted by the works division of the
Trincomalee UC. But the private firm “CGL International Eco Pvt., Ltd.” has contracted with
the Trincomalee UC to operate the disposal site, including the sorting of valuable materials,
since October 2015 without any commission fee. The disposal amount at the disposal site is
62.2 ton/day (Trincomalee UC: 38.2ton/day, Town & Gravets PS: 5.2 ton/day, Police: 12.0
ton/day, other: 4.2 ton/day) according to the records at the gate.
The area of the current disposal site is approximately 0.4 hectares. Trincomalee UC has plans,
however, to extend the area to approximately 12 hectares.
The location of incoming waste from the two local authorities to the Kanniya disposal site and
other details are provided in the following figure and table.
104
Table 4-53: Details of Kanniya disposal site

Site name Kanniya disposal site
21) Address Kanniya village, at about 9 km away from the city center of Trincomalee
22) Coordination E:081°10’07.1” N:08°36’36.4”
23) Method of operation Open dumping (with security control)
Trincomalee Town & Gravets
Year Navy Police Other Total
24) Disposal UC PS
amount 2015
(t/day) (Apr. – Sept. 38.2 5.2 2.6 12.0 4.2 62.2

average)
25) Expected remaining
????
life span (years) in 2015
of final disposal site CGL International Eco Pvt Ltd

28) Unit cost of operation 92
(LKR/t) in 2015
Currently approximately 2 ha (approximately 5 acres)
29) Disposal area (ha) Future approximately 10 ha（25acres）
Total: approximately 12 ha
Clearance
Kanniya disposal site
Trincomalee Town &

Gravets PS Trincomalee UC
Legend
Boundary of Trincomalee UC
Figure 4-25: Location of incoming waste from two local authorities to the Kanniya
disposal site
105
Figure 4-26: Satellite image of the Kanniya disposal site
b.5 Issue of Technical System

Due to the insufficient number of waste collection workers and malfunction of collection
vehicles, the Trincomalee UC does not properly collect the waste and this causes sanitary and
environmental issues in the town. According to an interview survey with the residents, although
the frequency of original waste collection was once a week, the actual frequency is once every
three weeks or less. Hence, the residents illegally discharge the waste on the road and this
causes waste scattering.
An insufficient budget and lack of knowledge of proper operation methods at the Kanniya
disposal site has caused the condition of the access road to deteriorate and much waste to be
scattered along this road. After the last load of collected waste is discharged at the disposal site
at around 2 pm, many wild elephants appear and scavenge the disposed waste every day.
Scavenging by elephants disturbs proper operation of the disposal site.
Photo: Scattered illegally discharged waste and wild elephants at the disposal site

There are no source separation programmes or activities organized by the Trincomalee UC.

There are no organic waste reduction programmes or activities organized by the Trincomalee
MC.
106

There are two recyclable material dealers – that purchase and sell on plastics, cans, metals and
other recyclable materials – in the Trincomalee UC and one in Town & Gravets PS. Taking
valuable materials to the shops is done by the waste collection drivers and private recyclers who
collect valuable materials from households.
Table 4-54: Prices of each valuable (recyclable) material
Valuable material Buying price (LKR/kg) Selling price (LKR/kg)
Metal 20 100
Plastic 20 100
Cardboard 8 300
Source: Trincomalee recyclable dealers
Photo: Recovered cardboard stacked in a Trincomalee recyclables dealer’s premises

ready for recycling
The private firm “CGL International Eco Pvt., Ltd.”, which was commissioned by the
Trincomalee UC to operate the Kanniya disposal site, has stated its intention to establish a
recyclables recovery facility to collect cardboard, plastics, metals and so on. Accordingly, the
collection and selling of valuable materials by the waste collection workers is prohibited by the
Trincomalee UC.

Since the source separation and separate collection are not officially conducted by the
Trincomalee UC as of October 2015, citizens separate and sell valuable materials to private
recycling shops (recyclables dealers) by themselves. The buying price of valuable materials to
private recycling shops is always affected by the international market price and it is not stable.
d. Public Awareness

Although the prevention of communicable diseases such as dengue fever is conducted as public
awareness activities, other public awareness activities related to solid waste management are not
carried out by the Trincomalee UC.
d.2 Issue of Public Awareness Activities

Since the public awareness activities related to solid waste management are not carried out by
the Trincomalee UC, the 3R activities are not amply disseminated to the residents.
e. Finance
107
e.1 Financial Condition of Urban Council

The difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the Trincomalee Urban Council
has been positive from 2012 to 2014 and its share in total annual revenues accounted for 18.1%
on average as shown in the table below..
Table 4-55: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Trincomalee UC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
1,000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 580,411 581,209 737,328
2 Actual
Revenue 481,883 531,127 712,151 575,054 100.0%
Grant 273,747 280,454 415,306 323,169 56.2%
Expenditure 468,790 479,713 465,242 471,248 81.9%
Recurrent 404,412 433,382 461,245 433,013 75.3%
Capital 64,378 46,331 3,997 38,235 6.6%
Profit or loss 13,093 51,414 246,909 103,805 18.1%
Source) Trincomalee UC ”Programme Budget：2013-2015”
roughly 56.2% as shown in the table below.
Table 4-56: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Trincomalee UC (Unit: thousand LKR)

Annual Average
%
LKR
Rates & Taxes 94,492 84,716 82,163 87,124 15.2%
Rents 12,126 13,064 11,016 12,069 2.1%
License 17,699 13,810 12,832 14,780 2.6%
Other Income 59,844 106,456 166,014 110,771 19.3%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 208,520 224,785 240,983 224,763 39.1%
Salaries 204,425 221,927 238,201 221,518 38.5%
Capital Grants 65,227 55,668 174,322 98,406 17.1%
Total Grants 273,747 280,453 415,305 323,168 56.2%
Total 481,882 531,126 712,150 575,053 100.0%
expenditures of theTrincomalee UC.
108
Table 4-57: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Trincomalee UC (Unit: Thousand

LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 9,114 4,896 4,312 6,107 1.3%
And Others Rervices
Interest 2,754 20,311 3,962 9,009 1.9%
Grants, Subsidies And Contributions 732 1,220 1,049 1,000 0.2%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures
e.2 SWM Finance

The total revenue of SWM mainly consists of tipping fee for the other LA’s waste at the
disposal site and the waste collection fee from business institute. It is approximately 8,511,000
LKR (2012) and 13,054,000 (2013), while the expenditure is 151,307,000 LKR (2012) and
177,320,000LKR (2014). The table below shows the financial data of SWM from 2012 to 2014.
Table 4-58: Annual Revenues and Expenses of SWM of Trincomalee UC (Unit:
Thousand LKR)
B Revenues: 2,310 13,054 8,511
Supplies And Material Expenditures:
Equipment For Disposing Garbage 19,043 21,925 23,574
Fuel And Lubricants
Uniforms for Workers
Awareness Program
Other supplies 1,433 1,022 2,239
Total Supplies and Materials Expenses 20,476 22,947 25,813
Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 10,144 1,875 603
Final Disposal Payment 19,243 9,327 15,713
Other Expenses 1,671 1,291 955

Collection of municipal solid waste is executed by the Trincomalee UC and the cost of waste
109
Table 4-59: Total cost of waste collection of Jaffna MC (2015)

Cost
Items
(1000LKR/year)
2 Fuel 7,500
3 Uniform 500
4 Repair and maintenance of vehicles 2,250
5 Vehicles insurance 545
6 Employee provident fund, trust fund 900
Total 67,345
67,345,000LKR/collection amount 38.2 ton/day/365day= 4,830(LKR/ton)

The tipping fee at the disposal site was free of charge before the private firm “CGL International
Eco Pvt., Ltd.” was commissioned by the Trincomalee UC in October 2015. The operation of
the disposal site has been started by “CGL International Eco Pvt., Ltd.” without any commission
fee and tipping fee. The private company is expecting profits from sorting of valuable materials
at the disposal site. The operation cost of disposal site consists of rental charge(s) of heavy
machinery and the salary for security, which leads to an average 1,127 LKR per ton of waste.
Table 4-60: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Trincomalee UC (2015)
Cost
Items
(1000LKR/year)
1 Salary of security (1,200LKR/day x 1person x 30daysx12months 438
2 Rental charge of heavy machinery 1,000
3 Others 14,275
Total 15,713
15,713,000LKR/38.2 ton/day/365day 1,127(LKR/ton)

the operation cost of final disposal site is 692 LKR/ton and it seems not to be sustainable for

The waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate obtained by the
University of Peradeniya report “Feasibility Assessment of the Plastic Recycling Center
Establishment in Akkarapattu Municipal Council Area” in August 2015. The results reveal the
municipal waste generation amount is 62.09 tons/day and the waste generation rate is
1,235g/person/day.
110
Table 4-61: The generation amount of MSW in the Trincomalee UC

Source Generation rate unit
sources (ton/day)

Commercial

Institutions Bank/Private office 5.25 Kg/(institution) 69 0.36


Industries
Drainage 1,000.00 Kg 1 1.00
Total 0 62.09
The results of a waste composition survey conducted in 2010 in the Kanniya UC by the
NSWMSC are quoted as the result of waste composition of the Trincomalee UC.
Table 4-62: Waste Composition of the Trincomalee UC (quoted from the Kanniya UC)
Category Rate (%)
1 Kitchen waste 12.0
2 Paper 4.0
3 Textiles 3.0
4 Grass & wood 37.0
5 Soft Plastics 2.0
6 Hard Plastics 1.0
7 Rubber & leather 1.0
8 Metal 1.0
9 Glass & bottles 2.0
10 Stone & ceramic 15.0
11 Other 22.0
total 100.0
111
4.4.4 The results of the Public Opinion Survey

60% of the surveyed households are Tamil, 26% Sinhalese and 14% Muslims. Data on the
average number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the table below.
High 51 4.7 58, 863
Middle 42 4.5 31, 524
Low 48 4.5 14, 569
Business 40 3.3 99, 789
Item No.Sample %
Yes 140 99
No 1 1
Total 141 100
Figure 4-27: Availability of garbage collection service in the Trincomalee UC
 In the Trincomalee UC, 99% of surveyed households are provided with a garbage
collection service, of which 99% stated they use this service. Only 34% of surveyed
households are “very satisfied” with the present SWM service provision, while 46% are
“somewhat satisfied”.
Item No.Sample %
Placing outside 8 6
Other 1 1
Total 141 100
Figure 4-28: Method of garbage discharge by residence in the TUC area
112
 Households’ main methods of waste discharge are shown in Figure 1. The most
common method is carrying garbage to the collection truck (87%). 6% of residences
discharge waste outside their premises for house to house collection while another 6%
carry waste to waste collection points.
 78% of surveyed households receive the garbage collection service once a week while
15% stated that they received the service less frequently than once a week. However,
61% discharge their garbage as soon as it is generated and 34% discharge their garbage
daily. The discrepancy between these figures explains the large amount of discarded
garbage present on many streets around Trincomalee.
 As shown in Figure-2, only 20% of surveyed households are unwilling to cooperate
with source separation for recycling while the majority (69%) are very much willing to
participate in the separate garbage collection system.
 In addition, 69% of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or
someone who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials.
collection system
Doing
Not willing already
20% 2% Item No.Sample %
Less willing
Less willing 3 2
2%
Not willing 28 20
Somewhat Doing already 3 2
willing Very much Total 141 100
7% willing
69%

collection system in Trincomalee UC
 Only 21% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also
use the finished compost for their own garden.
 Many surveyed households (60%) have discussed proper garbage discharge methods at
the community level.
 72% of households stated that SWM awareness programmes are very necessary while
24% stated “somewhat necessary”.
 The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is 37 ± 57
LKR/month per household. However, 23% of households do not like to pay for SWM
services.
 Out of all surveyed households, only 9% stated that they sell/give-away metal for
recycling and 2% of residences sell/give-away tins & cans for recycling. Glass and
bottle recycling is only practiced by 1% of households while plastic recycling is
practiced by 11%. The percentage of households who are involved in paper recycling
(selling or giving-away) was low (2%).
113
4.4.5 Waste flow

survey, statistical data collection, and census results.
onsite compost is 5.6%, material recovery is 0.2%, and the total rate is 5.8%. On the other hand,
the final disposal rate for the generation amount has reached 61.5%, which has become a burden
on the Kanniya disposal site.
1. Waste generation
62.1 t/d
(100.0%)

39.1 t/d 1.7 t/d
(62.9%) (2.7%)
3.5 t/d 0.1 t/d
(5.6%) (0.2%)
15.3 t/d 39.0 t/d
(24.6%) (62.7%)
9. Recycling (1)
2 t/d
(3.9%)
2.5 t/d 38.2 t/d
(4.1%) (61.5%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
12. Final disposal
38.2 t/d
(61.5%)
Figure 4-30: Waste flow in Trincomalee UC (2015)

There is no factory discharging industrial waste or hazardous waste in the Trincomalee UC.

The waste generation from hospitals mainly consist of municipal waste and the infectious waste
(syringes, etc.) is not collected nor taken to the disposal site since it is incinerated in on-site
incinerators.

The Trincomalee UC collects municipal waste from the hospitals and takes it to the Kanniya
disposal site.
b.3 Collection fee
114
The collection fee of municipal waste from hospitals is charged the same as large waste
generators in accordance with the size of the waste barrel.
c.1 Collection Amount

The disposal amount of night soil at the Kanniya disposal site is approximately 11,600 litres/day,
according to the records.
c.2 Collection / Transportation and Disposal

Night soil is collected by collection vehicles operated by the Trincomalee UC and the collected
night soil is disposed of at the Kanniya disposal site without any treatment.
c.3 Collection fee

The collection fee of night soil is 0.66Rs/litre for liquid only, while sludge is 1.30Rs/litre.
a. Rehabilitation of existing final disposal site

Trincomalee UC has discharged the collected waste at the existing Kanniya disposal in the
forest site since 2005 and it has caused the serious environmental issue surround area, therefore
the rehabilitation of existing disposal site is required as soon as possible. The other issue is
caused by many wild elephants which appear from the forest and scavenge the discharged waste
at the disposal site around 2 p.m. every day. The wild elephants are quite dangerous to the
human being and those disturb the operation of existing disposal site. The solution of
anti-elephants at the existing disposal site is necessary.
b. Improvement of discharging and collection

c. Promotion of 3Rs
Any 3Rs activities are not officially carried out by Trincomalee UC. The private company has
managed the operation of existing disposal site since October 2015 and it will start the sorting
of valuable material waste in the future. The promotion of 3Rs to reduce the amount of waste
at generation source is needed.
d. Improvement of Organization and Legislation

Trincomalee UC spends much budget and human resource to collect and discharge waste every
day without the long term plan including organization and legislation. The formulation of
master plan of solid waste management is needed to improve and develop the future policy,
legislation, organization, and budgeting regarding on solid waste management.
115
4.5 Kurunegala Municipal Council in Northern Western Province
The Kurunegala Municipal Council is situated in western Sri Lanka and well known for its
historically important religious places as well as its location as a gateway to major towns of the
country such as Colombo, Kandy, Negombo, Anuradhapura and Trincomalee. The climate of
the Kurunegala MC is characterized by a “Tropical rainforest”. The dry season is from February
to September and the average annual precipitation is approximately 1,570mm. The coolest
average temperatures in the year are in December and January with an average temperature of
approximately 26 degrees Celsius, while April to September has the hottest average
temperatures in the year at an average of approximately 30 degrees Celsius.
The Kurunegala MC is the capital city of the Northern Western Province and is the core of
politics, economy and culture. Since the Kurunegala MC is the main service centre of the
province, the large number of service oriented institutions as well as higher education centers
located within the boundaries of Kurunegala MC serve a floating population of about 250,000.
On the other hand, since manufacturing activities are restricted within the LA area, it is home to
only two garment factories.
The Kurunegala MC consists of twelve Grama Nilathari Divisions (GN divisions) and twelve
wards. The population of the Kurunegala MC between 2010 and 2015 is shown in the following
table.
Table 4-64: Population Trend of the Kurunegala MC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population 27,141 27,682 26,931 27,043 26,727 26,903
Source: Sampath Pathikada of District Secretariat Kurunegala

The North Western Province Environmental Statute No. 12 of 1990 in the chapters below
mentions plans and all necessary steps to be carried out to prevent the discharge of wastes into
the environment and the measures for protecting and improving of the quality of the
environment.
 Power and Functions of The Provincial Authority
 Environmental Projection
 Environmental Quality
 General

The Kurunegala MC has prepared a 5 year plan for 2010-2014 and 2015 -2018
a.3 Organization
Solid waste management is carried out by the Municipal Health Department (MHD) headed by
the MOH who is responsible for overall SWM activities. The main responsibilities of the MHD
116
are the following:

 Allocation of labour/vehicles to collect, transport and dispose waste and maintaining the
cleanliness and sanitation conditions of the municipal area.
 Cleaning of streets and drains and removal of such waste
 Septic tank and toilet emptying service
 Maintenance of public market, pola, slaughterhouse and cemetery
 Operation of recycling center and compost facility
 Infectious disease prevention services and control of fly and mosquito breeding sites
 Maternity and child care activities
 School health activities
 Activities related to food hygiene and safety
The health section receives direct support from the Municipal Engineers Department (MED) for
vehicle repair, maintenance and driver management which is essential for SWM activities. Also
the MED is responsible for the construction work related to SWM.
The PHI is assigned to SWM and full responsibility is handed over to him. The other four PHIs
assist with the SWM duties and responsibilities of the MHD officers.
The organization chart and staff related to solid waste management of the Kurunegala UC is
shown below.
Chief Medical Officer of
Health
Additional Medical
Office of Health
Registered
Chief Public Medical officer Nursing
Health Inspector Officer
Development Officers- 04 Midwifes -

Public Health SWM Public Health Local Government 04
Officer - 02 Chief
Inspector -04 Inspector Management
Assistant
Management
Assistant-03
Driver - Cemetery Health

11 Cemetery machine operator Public fair Supervisor -02
caretaker caretaker
Office Assistant -
02
Crematoriu Health
m caretaker labours-
118
Figure 4-31: Organizational chart of the Kurunegala MC
117
Table 4-65: Staff related to SWM in the Kurunegala MC

Engineer 1
Add MOH 1
Health Overseer 2
Sub Overseer 12
Temporary 28
Two of them are night
Driver 15 soil collection vehicle
derivers
Disposal site workers Acting supervisor 2
Compost and recycling
Permanent 20
facility
Temporary 6
DO, Mgt Asst, Office
Other 9
Asst, Care takers,
Total 144

With regard to organization, the experienced MOH and PHI have taken the actual command of
waste management and are working in close collaboration with the PHI and the SV. However,
the absence rate of disposal site workers for the compost and recycling facility is high and it
often causes a malfunction of the facility.
b. Technical System

The kerbside collection is conducted by the Kurunegala MC and the residences have to store
their mixed waste in a plastic barrel or a polythene sack and discharge them in front of their
houses on the collection day. The owners of restaurants and shops also store their waste in
plastic barrels of 100 or 200 litres, which are collected by door to door collection.

Collection and transportation of solid waste is conducted by the Kurunegala MC as follows.
Table 4-66: The list of collection method, target area, frequency and target waste
Collection
Target area Frequency Target waste
Method
Every day/ Every other day Biodegradable
Residential Non-
House to house Once a week
biodegradable
Commercial Every day Mixed
Every day/ Every other day Biodegradable
Residential Non-
Separate Once a week
biodegradable
Commercial -
Some small transfer stations for the SW called “Health Depot” have been installed in the city
market site and the Solid Waste Management Center and solid waste between 6 tons to 10 tons
118
is collected everyday by handcarts and is transported to the final disposal site.
Photo: The small transfer station installed in the city market

The waste collection covers 100 % of the Kurunegala MC area and no collection fee is charged
neither for residents nor large scale waste generators.
The collection vehicles and equipment are shown in the table below;
Table 4-67: Collection vehicles and equipment of the Kurunegala MC
Vehicle type Number of vehicles Notes
Compactor truck 6 4 trucks under repairing
Tractor 12 4 tractors under repairing
Hand Cart 38
Lorry 2
Source: Kurunegala MC
The running mileage and collected area of every vehicle are recorded as a working record by the
Kurunegala MC. Repair and maintenance of collection vehicles are conducted at the workshop
on the premises of the Kurunegala MC. The breakdown of personnel in the workshop is as
follows.
Table 4-68: The personnel composition of the work shop in Kurunegala MC
Staff Number of personnel
Technical Officer 1
Mechanic 1
Painter 1
Tinker 1
Driver 2
Others 9
Photo: The Workshop in Kurunegala MC
119

Intermediate treatments are carried out by the Kurunegala MC as follows.
Table 4-69：Intermediate treatment facilities in Kurunegala MC

Execution Capacity Establishme
Types of Facility Address Notes
Body (ton/day) nt year
The capacity has
Compost plant 50 2012 decreased to 2 ton/day
Sundarapola due to a lack of labour.
Kurunegala
Sorting Yard 2 2010
MC
Recycling facility 3 2010
Public
Biogas facility 1 2014
market
Two tons of organic waste from the town market and regular fair is collected and transferred to
the compost plant which has a 50 ton capacity at the final disposal site.. Materials for pipes and
bags are made of thread and grinded hard plastic at the Recycling facility. Organic waste
corresponding to 6 tons per week is collected and generated methane gas every week. Bio-gas
generation would cover the monthly electricity charge which is roughly 40,000LKR on the
public market.
Photo 4：Compost plant, grinder machine in recycling facility and bio-gas generation
facility
b.4 Final disposal

The solid waste collected by the Kurunegala MC and the Kurunegala PS is transferred to the
Sundarapola final disposal site located in the Kurunegala PS. The Sundarapola final disposal
site was established and has been in operation since 1922.
The operation area has approximately 5ha and the number of remaining sustainable years is
expected to be approximately 10 years. The Kurunegala MC has the responsibility of vehicle
record management at the entrance gate and regular waste relocation by heavy machines. A
bobcat and an excavator are usually allocated in the Sundarapola final disposal site. The
discharged solid waste amount is approximately 38 ton/day from the Kurunegala MC,
approximately 10 ton/day from the Kurunegala PS and is estimated at approximately 48 ton/day
in total. Discharged solid waste includes municipal solid waste from hospitals and factories as
well. A tipping fee is charged to the solid waste only from the outside area of the Kurunegala
MC and the Kurunegala PC.
120
Table 4-70：Tipping fee at the Sundarapola final disposal site for solid waste
Types of vehicle and waste Tipping fee (LKR)
Three wheelers／Solid waste 220
Tractor／Solid waste 1,250
Dump truck／Solid waste 1,550
Dump truck／Glass 1,750
The location of incoming waste from the two local authorities to the Sundarapola disposal site
and other details are provided in the following figure and table.
Table 4-71: Detailed information about the disposal site of the Kurunegala MC
Site name Sundarapola disposal site
31) Address Waste e Center, Sundarapola, Yanthanpalaw
32) Coordination E:080°21’08.2” N:07°30’35.7”
33) Method of operation Open dumping (with security control)
Kurunegala
34) Disposal Year Kurunegala PS Army Private Total
MC
amount 2015
(t/day) 1,159.2 304.7 18.6 8.6 1491.0
(9月- 10月平均)
span (years) in 2015 10 years
36) Executing organization Kurunegala MC


Unknown
(LKR/t) in 2015
39) Disposal area (ha) Current approximately 5.25 ha (approximately13acr)
and Environmental Environmental License was acquired in only first year.
Clearance
The solid waste flow for collecting, hauling and disposing in the Kurunegala MC are as follows
Sundarapola FDS, Sorting Yard and Compost Yard
Kurunegala PS
Legend
The boundary of Kurunegala MC
Kurunegala MC
Biogas facility
0 250m 500m 1km
Figure 4-32: The solid waste flow for collecting, hauling and disposing in Kurunegala
MC
121
Figure 4-33: Satellite photograph of Sundarapola final disposal site
b.5 Issue of technical system

Regarding waste collection and waste hauling in the Kurunegala MC, the residents complain
about the low frequency for waste collection due to the low attendance of collection workers.
95% of the workers are Tamil. They often quit their job due to a low salary and go to Kandy and
Colombo as migrant workers. Regarding separate collection, although the separate collection
rate reached 75% in commercial areas and 50% in residential areas, the drivers have to collect
the separated waste and discharge it to the Sundarapola final disposal site as mixed waste
because they also have to cover the area for separate collection and unseparated (mixed)
collection in the same day.
Regarding the workshop in the Kurunegala MC, the shortage of workers and vehicle
replacement parts makes outsourcing necessary for major repairs. During the repair period, the
collection area by the Kurunegala MC becomes limited due to the long procedure from the
request to approval and finally completion for repair(s).
Regarding the compost yard in the Sundarapola final disposal site, the produced amount of
compost has decreased since June 2015 due to the shortage of workers caused by employment
122
problems. Therefore, only 2tons/day of solid waste can be accepted at the compost yard. The
compost price was originally 10LKR/5kg but is now 10LKR/1kg because of a stock shortage.
The biogas facility was originally intended to generate 2.8kWh, sufficient to cover the monthly
electricity requirements of the city market, which currently has a monthly electricity bill of
roughly 40,000LKR. But the system is not currently functioning and generated methane gases
are emitted in the atmosphere.
At the Sundarapola final disposal site, one or two complaints are made every day in the
neighbourhood due to the offensive odor and a large number of harmful insects. Sludge which
cannot be sent to the treatment facility is discharged to the pit excavated in the dumping area for
solid waste because of inefficient capacity of the sludge treatment facility.
c. Recycling activity

As it was mentioned, the separate collection was initiated in December 2012 by the Kurunegala
MC and the separation rate reached 75% in commercial areas and 50% in residential areas.

There are no points worthy of special mention.

The Kurunegala MC allocates a supervisor and two workers in charge of purchasing and
collecting recyclable waste in the Waste Management Center (WMC). A small facility is also
installed in the WMC to transfer collected waste by some handcarts to a tractor and the
collection workers of the handcarts can receive a monthly average income of between 300 and
400LKR by selling the collected recyclable waste. The recyclable waste items along with the
buying price and the collection amount in the WMC are as follows (also refer to the photo
following the tables).
Table 4-72: The buying price and collection amount of recyclable waste in WMC
Item Buying price Collection amount
(LKR/kg) (kg/day)
Metal 20 50
Cardboard 8 150
Polythene 15 10
Plastic 15 50
Glass 1.5 200
Paper 5 40
Pet bottle 15 30
Coconut shell 4 50
Battery 50 1
Copper 350 1
Aluminium 250 5
Tin 8 50
Source: Waste Management Centre
On the other hand, there are 5 or 6 recyclable materials “middlemen” dealers in the
administrative boundary of the Kurunegala MC and their buying price, selling price and
collection amount of recyclable waste items are shown below. The recyclable waste carried
from the administrative boundary of the Kurunegala MC occupies roughly half of the total.
123
Table 4-73: The selling price, purchase price and collection amount of recyclable
materials by “middlemen” dealers in KMC
Item Buying price Selling price Collection amount
(LKR/kg) (LKR/kg) (t/month)
Metal 20 28 5
Cardboard 13 14 3
Plastic 20-40 70 0.1
Glass bin 2 3-5 1
Paper 4-10 18-30 0.2-0.8
Copper 400-450 500 0.1
Aluminium 100-110 140 0.2
Source: Middleman shop’s owner
Photo：Recyclable waste separated in Waste Management Centre

The WMC and middlemen dealers have a common issue which is the shortage of stock space.
According to the dealers, they will be able to increase the amount they purchase if they are able
to expand the space of their premises as there is a high buyer demand.
d. Public Awareness


The personal (door-to-door) visits and awareness activities for schools and citizen groups,
distribution of leaflets, posters on bulletin boards and seminars are implemented by the
Kurunegala MC, NGO and IWMI (International Water Management Institute)

e. Finance
e.1 Financial Condition of Municipal Council

The difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the Kuunegala Municipal Council
124
has been negative from 2012 to 2014 and its share in total annual revenues accounted for
-51.97% on average as shown in the table below.
Table 4-74: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Kurunegala MC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
1,000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 7,302,904 800,693 1,146,224
2 Actual 794,605 110,460 1,186,220
Revenue 687,595 456,515 503,741 549,284 100.0%
Grant 280,677 136,249 162,037 192,988 35.1%
Expenditure 730,213 731,748 1,041,523 834,494 151.9%
Recurrent 333,817 387,570 399,040 373,475 68.0%
Capital 396,396 344,178 642,483 461,019 83.9%
Profit or loss -42,618 -275,233 -537,782 -285,211 -51.9%
Source: Kurunegala MC, “Programme Budget：2013-2015”
Table 4-75: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Kurunegala MC (Unit: thousand LKR)

Annual Average
%
LKR
Rates & Taxes 120,985 141,325 142,500 134,937 18.0%
Rents 49,199 62,181 69,475 60,285 8.0%
License 6,058 6,456 7,856 6,790 0.9%
Other Income 43,440 44,020 46,374 44,611 5.9%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 125,100 135,109 160,897 140,369 18.7%
Salaries 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 0.2%
Council Members Allowances
Other Recurrent Grant 323,373 344,178 642,483 436,678 58.2%
Capital Grants 323,373 344,178 642,483 436,678 58.2%
Total Grants 604,050 664,444 984,187 750,894 100.0%
Total 125,100 135,109 160,897 140,369 18.7%
The share of capital grants in the total revenues is accounting for around 57.0%. On the other
hand, the amount of total recurrent expenditures occupies 43.0% in the total expenditures of the
pradeshiya sabha.
125
Table 4-76: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Kurunegala MC (Unit: Thousand

LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 2,807 4,265 4,363 3,812 0.4%
And Others Rervices
Interest 19,313 19,735 15,617 18,222 2.1%
Grants, Subsidies And Contributions 20,243 21,152 22,832 21,409 2.5%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures
Total Expenditure 730,213 731,750 1,146,151 869,371 100.0%
e.2 SWM Finance

The total revenue of Municipal Health Department mainnly consists of the tipping fee for
incoming waste from other LA’s at the disposal site waste and the collection fee from business
institute. It is approximately 2,310,000 LKR (2012) and 13,054,000 (2014), while the
exipenditre is 44,718,000 LKR (2012) and 69,046,000LKR (2013). The table below shows the
financial data of Municipal Health Department from 2012 to 2014.
Table 4-77: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Municipal Health Department of
Kurunegala MC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
B Revenues: 2,310 13,054 8,511
Equipment For Disposing Garbage 585 815 820
Fuel And Lubricants 11,100 4,587
Uniforms for Workers 76
Boots for Workers 101
Other supplies 3,305 42
Total Supplies and Materials Expenses
Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 175 100
Final Disposal Payment 100
Other Expenses 3,333 1,797 3,340

Collection of municipal solid waste is executed by the Kurunegala MC and the cost of waste
126
Table 4-78: Total cost of waste collection of Kurunegala MC (2015)

Items Cost (1000LKR/year)
2 Fuel 4,557
3 Mechanical & Electrical Goods 13,500
4 Medical supplies -
5 Uniform 285
6 Buckets, basket -
7 Repairs vehicles 1,467
8 Maintenance 710
9 Employee provident fund, trust fund 2,803
Total 111,763
111,762,741LKR/collection amount 44.8ton/day/365day 6,834(LKR/ton)

The tipping fee at the disposal site is free for waste from the Kurunegala MC and the
Kurunegala PS. The operation cost of disposal sites consist of rental charge(s) for heavy
machinery and the salary for security, which leads to an average of 921LKR per ton of waste.
Table 4-79: Total operation cost of the disposal site of the Kurunegala MC (2015)
Cost
Items
(1000LKR/year)
1 Salary of security (1,200LKR x 2persons x 30daysx12months) 231
2 Rental charge of heavy machinery 1,407
Total 1,638
1,638,350LKR/38.6 ton/day/365day 116(LKR/ton)

the operation cost of final disposal site is 116LKR/ton and it seems not to be sustainable for
4.5.3 Waste amount and Waste composition
a. Waste amount
The waste amount in the Kurunegala MC is calculated by the waste generation unit of each
source mentioned in the SWM Action Plan (2008) by the NSWMSC and the waste generation
number of each source collected by the local survey in this project. As a result, the total waste
generation unit in the Kurunegala MC is 1.84kg/person/day.
127
Table 4-80: SW generation amount in the Kurunegala MC

sources (ton/day)
Collection 0.25 Kg/person/day 25,571 6.49
Residential
Non-collection 0.25 Kg/person/day 522 0.13
Hotels (small) 9.65 Kg/(hotel) 38 0.37
Commercial Restaurants (small) 9.65 Kg/(restaurant) 126 1.22
Institutions
Large 1,490.8 Kg/(industry) 3 4.47
Industries
Market 649.30 Kg/market 3 1.95
Port - Kg/port 0 0.00
Drainage 745.40 Kg 7 5.22
Recyclables 382.43 Kg 7 2.68
Total 48.07
Population 26,093 person
1.84
Total waste generation unit
kg/person/day
Source: SWM Action Plan (2008), NSWMSC
b. Waste composition
Waste composition in the Kurunegala MC is referred to in the survey results in the SWM
Action Plan (2008) by the NSWMSC. The result revealed the ratio of organic waste composed
of kitchen waste and grass & wood occupies less than 70%, on the other hand, the ratio of
recyclable waste composed of paper, textiles, plastic, metal and glass & bottles occupies close
to 30%, which is the urbanized waste composition.
128
Table 4-81: Waste composition in Kurunegala MC

Category Ratio
Kitchen waste 52.0%
Paper 15.7%
Textiles 5.9%
Grass & wood 16.0%
Soft Plastics 4.8%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
Metal 2.0%
Other 0.6%
100.0%
Source: SWM Action Plan (2008), NSWMSC
4.5.4 The result of public opinion survey
 The demographics for the surveyed households are as follows: 81% are Sinhalese, 17 %
are Tamils and 2 % Muslims. The ethnicity could be further classified into income
groups; 100% of the Sinhalese households make up the high income group, 98 % of
Sinhalese make up the middle income group and 50 % of low income families were
made up of Tamils. The data of the average number of people per household and
monthly income is shown in the table below.
High 48 4.3 63,521
Middle 52 4.4 34,865
Low 50 4.8 16,100
Business 41 6.2 371,243
Item No.of Sample %
Yes 147 98
No 3 2
Total 150 100
Figure 4-34: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kurunegala MC

 collection service, of which 98% stated they use this service. 68 % of surveyed
households are “very satisfied” with the present SWM services provision, while 26 %
are “somewhat satisfied”.
129
No.of
Item %
Sample
Other 0 0
Irrelevant 5 3
Total 150 100
Figure 4-35: Method of garbage discharge by residences in the KMC area

 Households’ main methods of waste discharge are shown in upper Figure. The most
common methods are carrying garbage to the collection truck (46%) and carrying
garbage to the collection point (27%), and discharging it outside their premises for
house to house collection (24%).
stated that they received the service 2-3 times/week.
 69% discharge their garbage as soon as it is generated and 27 % discharge their garbage
daily. Only 4% discharge their garbage 2-3 times per week.
 As shown in lower Figure, 65 % of households separate their garbage into organic and
inorganic waste at the source of generation. Only 5 % of surveyed households are
not/less willing to participate in source separation for recycling. The rest of the
households are very much willing (23 %) and somewhat willing (7 %) to participate in
the source separated garbage collection system.
 Further, 73 % of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or
someone who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials. Hence, an
informal recycling system is well established in the Kurunegala MC area.
collection system
Very much
willing No.of
Item %
23% Sample
Somewhat
willing
7% Less willing 0 0
Not willing 8 5
Less willing Doing already 98 65
Doing 0%
already Total 150 100
65%
Not willing
5%

collection system in the Kurunegala MC
130
 20 % of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and 97% of

them used the finished compost for their own garden.
methods at the community level, but 35% said that they discussed the garbage issue at
community meetings.
 92 % of households stated that SWM awareness programmes are very necessary while
7 % stated “somewhat necessary”. Only 1% of surveyed households stated that
awareness campaigns are not necessary or not needed at all.
 49 % of households do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue
tax they paid for the KMC. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM
services is 68 ± 94 LKR/month per household.
 Out of all surveyed households, 11% stated that they sell/give away glass and bottles for
recycling and 6% of residences sell/give-away plastics for recycling. Also, 1-8% of
households sell/give-away cans and metals for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
were 0 % and 10 % respectively.
4.5.5 Waste flow

The current waste flow in the Kurunegala MC is shown below. This was the result of analysis
by collected statistic information, the census data in 2012, the public opinion survey and the
waste generation survey in this project.
1. Waste generation
48.1 t/d
(100.0%)

44.9 t/d 0.6 t/d
(93.4%) (1.2%)
1.3 t/d 0.1 t/d
(2.7%) (0.2%)
0.6 t/d 44.8 t/d
(1.2%) (93.2%)
9. Recycling (1)
6.7 t/d
(14.0%)
0.7 t/d 38.6 t/d
(1.5%) (80.4%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
12. Final disposal
38.6 t/d
(80.4%)
Figure 4-37: Current waste flow in Kurunegala MC （2015）

According to the waste flow, the waste collection ratio, which corresponds with the ratio of the
discharged amount plus the ratio of the direct hauled waste amount, is calculated at 94.6%. The
total of the ratio of on-site compost and self-disposal is 3.9%; and the ratio of illegal dumping is
1.5%. On the other hand, the ratio of the recycling, which occupies 14% in total, is high.
131

There are two garment factories in the boundary of the Kurunegala MC, but industrial waste
(IW) is not discharged by either of the factories. Therefore, it is mentioned regarding solid
waste (SW) generated from the industrial sector as follows.
The collection and hauling of SW generated from the industrial sector is conducted by the
Kurunegala MC and the hauled monthly amount to the SFDS is approximately two tractor
loads.
a.2 Collection, Transpiration and Disposal
The IW is hauled to the SFDS by tractor and the tipping fee for discharge is 1,550Rs per
tractor.
As of November 2015, the amount of solid waste generated from the medical sector hauled to
the SFDS ranges between 1.5 and 2 tons/day. Regarding the medical waste (MW) such as used
hypodermic syringes and needles, they are disposed by incineration facilities.

The collection and hauling of SW generated from the medical sector is conducted by the
Kurunegala MC.
b.3 Tipping fee

It is free of charge, the same as with SW generated from other sectors.

The discharged amount of night soil at the SFDS ranges between18,000 – 20,000L/day.

The collection and hauling of night soil is conducted by the Kurunegala MC. A sludge which
cannot be sent to the treatment facility is discharged to the dumping area for SW because of
inefficient capacity of the sludge treatment facility.
c.3 Tipping fee

The tipping fee is shown below and is different depending on the location and distance.
132
Table 4-83: Tipping fee for night soil in the Kurunegala MC

Inside of Kurunegala Outside of Kurunegala
MC MC
Small Large Small Large
Capacity of collection vehicle 1,800 3,800 1,800 3,800
(L)
Service charge for residential 3,000 3,500 - 4,000
area (LKR)
Service charge for commercial 3,500 4,000 - 4,500
area (LKR)
Less than10km 300
Transportation 10 - 20km 400
fee (LKR) More than
500
20km
Tax (13%)
a. Improvement technical system
a.1 Improvement of compost plant and final disposal site

The proper operation of existing disposal site is essential in Kurunegala MC to extend the
limited capacity and utilize Sundarapola final disposal site as long as possible, however the
compost plant is not properly operated due to lack of technical and budget aspect. The
improvement of existing compost plant is need as soon as possible.
The moving of discharged waste at the existing disposal site is carried out by heavy machinery
regularly, however the frequency of covering soil is not enough and it causes environmental
issue to surrounding area. The improvement of existing disposal site is need as soon as possible.
a.2 Improvement of discharging and collection

a.3 Promotion of 3R
According to the result of WACS, the kitchen waste and garden waste occupy 68% of waste
generation in Kurunegala MC. Kurunegala MC is conducting the compost plant to deal with the
mixed waste and the material recovery facility; however the handling amount is not so large due
to lack of technical issue and management issue

Kurunegala MC spends much budget and human resource to collect and discharge waste every
day without the long-term plan including organization and legislation. The formulation of
master plan of solid waste management is needed to improve and develop the future policy,
legislation, organization, and budgeting regarding on solid waste management.
133
4.6 Nuwara Eliya Municipal Council in Central Province
The Nuwara Eliya MC, which is the capital town of Nuwara Eliya district in Central Province.
The Nuwara Eliya MC which land height above sea level is approximately1,900m is located
near Horton highland where is the highest peak in Sri Lanka. Although the climate of Sri Lanka
belongs to tropical rain forest, the Nuwara Eliya MC belongs to marine west coast climate and
the coolest in Sri Lanka. The history of the Nuwara Eliya MC started as a Britain style summer
resort during the colonial period and the golf course, horse race course, hotels, cottages, tea
plantations, tea factories, villas of government have been constructed since in 1900’s.
The main industry of the Nuwara Eliya MC consists of the eco-tourism to visit the highland,
waterfalls and so on, the garment and cosmetic factories and the highland vegetable farms such
as tomato, strawberry, and so on32.
The Nuwara Eliya MC consists of 15 Grama Nilathari Divisions (GN divisions), which are
minimum administrative units. The population of Nuwara Eliya MC between 2012 and 2015 is
shown in the following table.
Table 4-84: Population Trend of Nuwara Eliya MC (2012-2015)
Year 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population 23,804 24,104 24,404 24,709
Source: Estimation based on the census data of 2012.

The Nuwara Eliya MC prepares the action plan including the Solid Waste Management and the
progress report of Health Section activity every year. The activities of solid waste
management in 2015 are described as follows;
 Abolishment of the stationed collection system:
The stationed collection system was stopped in the one of three collection area in October due to
waste scattering caused by stray animals. Accordingly the door to door collection or bell
collection started instead of the stationed collection system. The Nuwara Eliya will stop the
stationed collection system at MC other two areas soon.
 Reduction of waste collection cost
a.2 Organization
The Nuwara Eliya MC reduced the cost of waste collection with changing the number of
collection workers from three persons to two people per collection vehicle.
The Organization of the Nuwara Eliya MC consists of following four departments;
 Secretarial Department
 Engineering Department
32
Modification some parts based on the report, "The preliminary survey for water supply and sewerage plan in Kandy and Nuwara
Eliya, 1998, JICA".
134
 Health Department
 Accounts Department
The Health Department is in charge of whole solid waste management, while the Engineering
Department is in charge of repairing and maintenance of collection vehicles and facilities at the
final disposal site.
Public Health Inspector (PHI) belonging to Health Department is a person in charge of solid
waste management of the Nuwara Eliya MC and the duty of PHI is shown as follows;
 Supervising of waste collection and transportation
 Management of final disposal site
 Management of Material Recovery Facility ( would be started from 2016)
 Management of night soil treatment
 Public awareness
The main duty of the Engineering Department consists of as follows;
 Repairing and maintenance of collection vehicles

 Operation and maintenance of final disposal site
The organization chart and staff related to solid waste management of the Nuwara Eliya MC is
shown below.
Figure 4-38: Organizational chart of the Nuwara Eliya MC
135
Table 4-85: Staff related to SWM in the Nuwara Eliya MC

Engineer 2 One of two is acting
TO(Technical Officer) 5 Two of five are in charge of SWM
SV(Supervisor) 6 Five of six are acting
Supervisor's Helpers/ 'kangani' 6
Temporary 25
Driver Permanent 11
Temporary -
Other (Compost yard) 6 Management assistant;3, Support staff;2
Computer operator;1
a.3 Solid waste management plan

Nuwara Eliya MC has formulated the action plan of solid waste management since the
feasibility study conducted by JICA in 2003.
a.4 Issue of Organization and Legal System

In SWM of Nuwara Eliya MC, the soft surface is conducted by Health Department, the hard
surface is conducted by Engineering Department, and therefore division of work content is clear.
And three PHIs are deployed to each collection area and they manage collection and
transportation. Because SWM in Nuwara Eliya MC is performed organized, there is no issue of
organization.
In institution, although the action plan of SWM is planned every year, there is no long-term plan.
It is necessary to plan a long-term master plan.
b. Technical System

Since the solid waste discharged by the residents was collected by the stationed collection
system before October 2015, the residents were able to discharge solid waste any time without
any rules of discharge schedule. But the kerbside collection system and the rule of discharge
schedule have been introduced by Nuwara Eliya MC since October 2015, hence the residents
must discharge the waste in front of the houses in accordance with the scheduled date at some
areas.

The collection and transferring of municipal solid waste to the final disposal site is carried out
by the Nuwara Eliya MC. The Nuwara Eliya is divided into three collection areas and PHI
managing the collection and transportation of solid waste is assigned at each area.
136
Figure 4-39: Solid Waste Collection Area in Nuwara Eliya MC
The Nuwara Eliya MC is collecting solid waste with following collection vehicles and 115
collection workers. Twenty five collection workers out of 115 workers are employed by
temporary contract. The collection vehicles consist of two compactor trucks and four tractors as
daily collection work.
Table 4-86: Solid waste collection vehicles owned by the Nuwara Eliya MC
Type Qty. Remarks
Compactor truck(12-14m3) 1
Compactor truck(6-8m3) 2 One of two is backup
Tractor 10 Two of ten are backup and four of ten are
under repairing
Handcart 35
Three wheeler 1 Collection of infectious waste
Night soil collection tanker 2 Capacity 7.5m3、3.5m3
VAN 1 Inspection (shared by the other department)
The solid waste collection system consists of kerbside collection, bell collection and stationed
collection in the Nuwara Eliya MC. There are two small scale transfer station for the solid waste
collected by handcart to tractors at town centre and market. Basically collection fee of waste is
not collected but 65,000LKR / month it is collected from only Economic Centre. Frequency of
solid waste collection is described in the table below.
137
Table 4-87: Frequency of solid waste collection of the Nuwara Eliya MC

solid waste collection system Frequency Remarks
Municipal solid waste: commercial and Daily
residential area in the town centre
Municipal solid waste: residential area in Every other day
outskirts
Separated waste(PET, plastic) Once a week One time every two weeks in
future
Inorganic waste Once a week One time every two weeks in
future
Economic Centre Daily
E-Waste Once a month Under consideration
Primary collection by handcart in the town Transfer station for the waste collected by
centre handcarts to tractors in the town centre.
Stationed collection systems causes waste Waste barrel installed by CEA in the town centre
scattering by stray animals
Photo: Current status of solid waste collection in the Nuwara Eliya MC
There is workshop of Nuwara Eliya MC in the town centre and all vehicles and equipment
including solid waste collection vehicles are repaired and maintained at the workshop.
Workshop has two mechanics, two welders, and two assistants and there is storage of road
construction material, such as gravel and sand.
138
Gavel and sand stored at the workshop Solid waste collection tractor under
maintenance
Photo: Workshop of the Nuwara Eliya MC

The separation of PET was introduced at some areas in the Nuwara Eliya MC since October
2015. Accordingly the recycling centre to separate, crush and bale PET and plastic was
constructed nearby current final disposal site in December 2015.
Table 4-88: Intermediate treatment facility in the Nuwara Eliya MC
Waste amount
Intermediate Execution
Address received Establishment Remarks
treatment body
(ton/week)
separation, crush and
Material Nuwara Moon
N.A. 2016 baling PET and
Recovery Facility Eliya MC plain
plastic
Photo: Under construction of Material Recovery Facility (left) and Crushing machine
(right)
b.4 Final disposal

The Moon plain final disposal site is located approximately 4km distance from town centre of
Nuwara Eliya MC. The Moon plain disposal site was constructed during JICA feasibility study
as pilot project in 2003. The disposal site receives the solid waste collected by the Nuwara Eliya
MC only.
The Moon plain disposal site was constructed with utilizing geographical features and consists
139
of disposal area, leachate treatment facility, night soil treatment facility, infectious waste
discharge pit, small scale incinerator for garden waste and material recovery facility.
The area of current disposal site is approximately two hectors and remained life time is more
than 10-15 years.
Waste disposal area Leachate treatment facility
Photo: the Moon plain final disposal site of the Nuwara Eliya MC
Moon Plain final

disposal site
▲
Town centre of Nuwara
Eliya MC
Figure 4-40: Location of Moon Plain final disposal site of the Nuwara Eliya MC
140
Table 4-89: Detail of Moon plain disposal site

Site name Moon Plain landfill site
41) Address Moon Plain, Nuwara Eliya
42) Coordination E80°48′5.9 N6°57′32.7
43) Method of operation Sanitary landfill
44) Dispo Year
sal
2015
amount 25.4
(10月-11月平均)
(t/day)
span (years) in 2015 10 – 15 years

Nuwara Eliya MC

(LKR/t) in 2015 92
Current: approximately 2 ha
49) Disposal area (ha) Future: 2 ha
Total: 4 ha
Clearance
Source: Nuwara Eliya MC
Figure 4-41: Satellite image of Moon plain disposal site
b.5 Issue of final disposal site

Since Moon Plain was constructed at valley with utilizing geographical features, the rainwater
and spring water easily gather and some of those are often flowing to the leachate treatment
facility. Administer of water reservoir located downstream of effluent from leachate treatment
facility complains that the effluent from Moon plain disposal site contaminated the public water
quality.
b.6 Issue of Waste collection and transportation

Since the waste collection workers do not have the plan of family finances, some of them often
take on leave next salary pay day. Furthermore, they often consume all salary within two weeks
141
after salary pay day and they work at tea plantation as part time job. Those absences of waste
collection workers cause the trouble of waste collection schedule.

The source separation has been started at some area of the Nuwara Eliya since October 2015
and it is planned to disseminate to all area after completion of construction of Material
Recovery Facility.

There is no compost plant managed by the Nuwara Eliya MC. The Nuwara Eliya MC intends to
onsite compost and will distribute the 7,500 number of compost barrels to the residents. The
Nuwara Eliya does not have the data of actual number of existing compost barrel and utilization
rate of it.
c.3 Recycling of Valuables Materials

There are five recycling centre managed by the Nuwara Eliya MC and private company in the
Nuwara Eliya MC boundary. The recycling centre receives plastic, metals polyethylene and
those buying price is shown in the table below.
Table 4-90: the Buying Price of Valuable Material
Buying price
Type of valuable material
(LKR/kg)
Plastic 10
Polyethylene 15-20
Metal 25
Paper 15
Source: Recycling centre
c.4 Issues of Recycling Activates

The buying price of valuable materials to private recycling shops is always affected by the
international market price and it is not always stable.
d. Public Awareness
d.1 Current Situation of Public Awareness Activates

The current situation of public awareness is well since the residents keep the Nuwara Eliya MC
clean and nice tourist town. The residents cooperate the introducing kerbside collection and
separate collection system to keep discharge time and date since October 2015. Public
awareness programme is often conducted by Nuwara Eliya MC with leaflet, poster, seminar and
so on.

The public awareness activities must be promoted to disseminate the kerbside collection and
separate collection system at whole area in Nuwara Eliya MC.
e. Finance
142
e.1 Finance condition of Municipal Council

The difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the Nuwara Eliya Municipal
Council has been positive from 2012 to 2014 and its share in total annual revenues accounted
for 7.7% on average as shown in the table below.
Table 4-91: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Nuwara Eliya MC(Unit:Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
1,000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 337,622 315,749 355,160
2 Actual
Revenue 296,259 309,773 373,915 326,649 100.0%
Grant 103,667 110,817 100,394 104,959 32.1%
Expenditure 373,098 277,921 355,212 335,410 102.7%
Recurrent 175,897 205,027 283,072 221,332 67.8%
Capital 197,201 72,894 72,140 114,078 34.9%
Profit or loss (76,839) 31,852 18,703 25,278 7.7%
Source: Nuwara Eliya MC, “Programme Budget：2013-2015”
Table 4-92: Breakdown of Annual Revenue of Jaffna MC (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
%
LKR
Rates & Taxes 74,371 78,265 81,957 78,198 23.9%
Rents 32,559 37,688 87,807 52,685 16.1%
License 11,477 15,098 16,771 14,449 4.4%
Warrant Costs And Fines 4,260 751 732 1,914 0.6%
Other Income 57,330 54,133 70,016 60,493 18.5%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant:
Salaries 73,760 109,796 99,370 94,309 28.9%
Council Members Allowances 960 1,021 1,024 1,002 0.3%
Other Recurrent Grant 564 564 0.2%
Capital Grants 28,383 28,383 8.7%
Total Grants 103,667 110,817 100,394 104,959 32.1%
Total 296,259 309,773 373,915 326,649 100.0%
The share of capital grants in the total revenues is accounting for around 34.0%. On the other
hand, the amount of total recurrent expenditures occupies 66.0% in the total expenditures of the
pradeshiya sabha.
143
Table 4-93: Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Nuwara Eliya MC (Unit:Thousand

LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 642 780 2,433 1,285 0.4%
And Others Rervices
Interest 3,472 7,916 5,929 5,772 1.7%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures
e.2 SWM Finance

The total revenue of Health Department mainly consists of the waste collection fee from
business institute. It is approximately from 2,012,000 LKR (2014) to 2,429,000 (2012), while
the exipenditre is from 23,658,000 LKR (2012) to 29,000,000LKR (2014). The table below
shows the financial data of Public Health Engineering Division from 2012 to 2014.
Table 4-94: Annual Revenues and Expenses of Health Department of Nuwara Eliya MC
(Unit: Thousand LKR)
B Revenues: 2,429 2,271 2,012
Uniforms for Workers 122 442 1
Boots for Workers 6 5 5
Awareness Program
Other supplies 4 17
Total Supplies and Materials Expenses 589 875 774
Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 5,128 2,374 2,040
Final Disposal Payment
Other Expenses 387 496 235

Collection and transportation of municipal solid waste is executed by the Nuwara Eliya MC and
the cost of waste collection is 3,730 LKR/tons (2013). The breakdown is as follows:
144
Table 4-95: Waste collection cost in Nuwara Eliya (2015)

Item Cost
(Thousad LKR)
1 Waste collection workers expenditure 71,808
2 Office expenses 6,258
3 Electricity 9
4 Other -
Total 78,075
78,075,000LKR/collection amount 25.0 ton/day/365day= 8,556 (LKR/ton)

Not available.

Nuwara Eliya Municipal council or external funds. And there is no linkage between revenue
from large waste collection and expenditure of SWM. Although Nuwara Eliya MC considers
the balance sheet between revenue and expenditure totally, the sustainability of SMW is not
considered well.

The waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate obtained by
“Waste Amount and Composition Surveys (WACS) implemented in the Central and Southern
Provinces of Sri Lanka, 2024.5, SATREPS” and “The Study on Improvement of Solid Waste
Management in Secondary Cities in Sri Lanka, Action Plan for the Nuwara Eliya, Final Report,
2003.12, JICA” and the number of waste generation source collected at the survey in November
2015. The results reveal the municipal waste generation amount is 32.0 tons/day and the waste
generation rate is 1,289g/person/day. Although the waste generation rate seems high, it includes
the waste generation of floating population such as tourist.
145
Table 4-96: Waste Generation Amount of the Nuwara Eliya MC

sources (ton/day)
Organic-shops
Commercial 71 0.77
(middle) 10.80 Kg/(shop)
Non-organic shops
122 1.14
(large) 9.31 Kg/(shop)
Non-organic shops
567 0.96
(small) 1.69 Kg/(shop)
Institutions
Industries
Total 31.84
The waste composition obtained by ”Waste Amount and Composition Surveys (WACS)
implemented in the Central and Southern Provinces of Sri Lanka, 2024.5, SATREPS” The
ration organic waste such as kitchen waste and garden waste occupies approximately 80%,
while the valuable materials such as paper, plastic and bottle is less than 20% of all waste
generation.
Table 4-97: Waste Composition of the Nuwara Eliya MC
Category Rate
Kitchen waste 74.6%
Paper 7.8%
Textiles 1.0%
Grass & wood 4.8%
Soft Plastics 4.2%
Hard Plastics 0.9%
Metal 0.9%
Other 3.2%
100.0%
4.6.4 The results of the Public Opinion Survey
48% of the surveyed households are Sinhalese, 47 % are Tamils and 5 % Muslims. The
146
ethnicity could be further classified into 60% Sinhalese in high income group, 68 % of
Sinhalese in middle income group and 82 % of low income families were Tamils. The data on
the average number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the table below.
High 47 4.3 60,383
Middle 53 5.2 27,340
Low 50 5.2 16,900
Business 37 3.4 349,083
No. of
Item %
Sample
Yes 146 97
No 4 3
Total 150 100
Figure 4-42: Availability of garbage collection service in the Nuwara Eliya MC
 In the Nuwara Eliya MC, 97 % of surveyed households are provided with a garbage
collection service, of which 95% stated they use this service. 55 % of surveyed households
are “very satisfied” with the present SWM services provision, while 27 % are “somewhat
satisfied”.
No. of
Item %
Sample
Placing outside 3 2
carrying to collection truck 48 32
Other 0 0
Irrelevant 2 1
Total 150 100
Figure 4-43: Method of garbage discharge by residences in NEMC area

147
common methods are carrying garbage to collection point (65%) and carrying to garbage
collection truck (32%) and discharging it outside their premises for house to house
collection (2%).
stated that they received the service 2-3 times/week.
 59% discharge their garbage as soon as it is generated and 32 % discharge their garbage
daily. Only 9% of discharge their garbage 2-3 times per week.
inorganic waste at the source of generation. Only 6 % of surveyed households are not/less
willing to cooperate with source separation for recycling. Rests of the household are very
much willing (50 %) and somewhat willing (4 %) to cooperate in the source separated
garbage collection system.
 Further, 72 % of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or someone
who comes to collect their reusable or recyclable materials. Hence, an informal recycling
system is well established in the Nuwara Eliya MC area.
collection system
Doing
already
35% No. of
Item %
Sample
Very much Very much willing 75 50
willing
Not willing
Less willing 2 1
10%
Not willing 15 10
Doing already 53 35
Less willing
Somewhat Total 150 100
1%
willing
4%

collection system in the Nuwara Eliya MC
 Only 17 % of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and 100% of
them used the finished compost for their own garden.
methods at the community level, but 26% said that they discussed the garbage issue at
community meetings.
 88 % of households stated that SWM awareness programmes are very necessary while
11 % stated “somewhat necessary”. Only 1% of surveyed households stated that awareness
campaigns are not necessary or not needed at all.
 51 % of household do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue tax
they paid for NEMC. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is
68 ± 125 LKR/month per household.
148
 Out of all surveyed households, 19 % stated that they sell/give away glass & bottles for
recycling and 2 % of residences sell/give-away plastics for recycling. Also, 7-10 % of
households sell/ give-away cans & metals for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
were 0 % and 4 % respectively.
4.6.5 Waste flow

statistical data collection, and census results.
1. Waste generation
32.0 t/d
(100.0%)

25.1 t/d 0.8 t/d
(78.5%) (2.4%)
2.8 t/d 0.1 t/d
(8.8%) (0.3%)
3.2 t/d 25.0 t/d
(10.0%) (78.2%)
9. Recycling (1)
0.4 t/d
(1.2%)
0.1 t/d 25.4 t/d
(0.3%) (79.4%)
11. Recycling (2)
0.0 t/d
(0.0%)
12. Final disposal
25.4 t/d
(79.4%)
Figure 4-45: Waste flow of the Nuwara Eliya MC (2015)

onsite compost is 6.0%, illegal dumping is 0.3% and material recovery is 0.4%. The increasing
rate of on-site compost and recycling are expected after the public awareness is promoted and
the operation of material increasing is started fully by the Nuwara Eliya MC.

There is no any industrial waste except for the construction waste in the Nuwara Eliya MC. The
construction waste is not collected by the Nuwara Eliya MC, hence the generator must transfer
it to designated discharge place. The generation and discharge amount of construction waste are
not recognized by the Nuwara Eliya MC. The designated discharge place of construction waste
is located in the horse racing course, and the construction waste is utilized for the repairing and
maintenance of horse racing course.
149
Photo: Construction Waste discharged at designated place in the horse racing course
a.1 Collection and tipping fee

There are no fees for construction waste charged by the Nuwara Eliya MC.

The syringe generated as infectious waste at the hospitals in the Nuwara Eliya MC is collected
two loads per week and discharged at final disposal site by the Nuwara Eliya MC.

The collection and transportation of infectious waste is carried out by the Nuwara Eliya MC.
The collected infectious waste is transport and discharge at the infectious waste pit near the
Moon Plain disposal site. The infectious waste disposal pit has been operated since the final
disposal site started the operation in 2003. The first infectious waste pit was covered by
concrete after filling the infectious waste. The second infectious waste pit was constructed by
the Nuwara Eliya MC and is functioning. The second infectious waste pit is expected to full
soon, hence small incinerator is planned to install at each hospital for onsite treatment.
Photo: Infectious waste pit
b.3 Collection and tipping fee

There is no collection and tipping fee for infectious waste charged by the Nuwara Eliya MC
150

The disposal amount of night soil is approximately 44 m3/day. (Night soil collection tanker of
3.5 m3: 4 roads/day, night soil collection tanker of 7.0 m3: 4 roads/day)
c.2 Collection/ Transportation and Disposal

Night soil is collected by collection vehicles operated by the Nuwara Eliya MC and the
collected night soil is disposed of at the treatment facility in the Moon Plain disposal site. The
collected night soil includes many condoms and sanitary napkins, and those often cause the
blockage of treatment facility.
c.3 Collection and treatment fee

The collection and treatment fee of night soil charged by the Nuwara Eliya MC is shown in the
table below.
Table 4-99: collection and treatment fee of night soil charged by the Nuwara Eliya MC
Capacity of night soil Generator Fee Remarks
collection vehicle (LKR/load)
7.5m3 Household 2,825 In case of out of Nuwara Eliya
7.5m3 Not household 4,520 MC boundary, the additional
fee is charged according to the
mileage
3.5m3 household 1,412.5
a.1 Improvement and monitoring of leachate treatment facility at the final

disposal site
Although the capacity of current final disposal site is quite enough for more than 10 years
operation, the leachate treatment facility has some issues of function and monitoring. The
proper monitoring has not been conducted for a couple of years, therefore it is difficult to
recognize whether the treatment facility is functioning or not, and whether the effluent causes
adverse environmental impact to down streams or not. The conducting regular monitoring,
improvement of leachate treatment facility, prevention of the storm water is necessary.
151
4.7 Moratuwa Municipal Council in Western Province
4.7.1 Outline of the Local Authority (LA)

The Moratuwa Municipal Council (MC) is a large suburb of Colombo City, on the southwestern
coast of Sri Lanka, near Dehiwala-Mount Lavinia. It is situated on the Galle–Colombo (Galle
road) main highway, 18 km south of Colombo city centre. Moratuwa is surrounded on three
sides by water—except in the north—by the Indian Ocean on the west, the Bolgoda lake on the
south and the east. The total area is 23.4 km2.
The main industries of the MC include manufacturing of furniture, rubber products, batteries,
transformers and wood handicrafts33. Although Moratuwa is considered the center of fisheries,
trade and commerce, the MC is most famous for its furniture.
The society in Moratuwa consists of all ethnic and religious groups that exist in the country.
Among these groups, the share of the Christian population is remarkably large in comparison
with those in other local authorities of the country, second only to Negombo.
Colombo's climate is fairly temperate all throughout the year. From March to April the average
maximum temperature is around 31 degrees Celsius. The only major change in Colombo’s
weather occurs during the monsoon seasons from May to August and October to January. This
is the time of year where heavy rains can be expected. Colombo sees a relatively small diurnal
temperature range, although this is more marked in the drier winter months, where minimum
temperatures average 22 degrees Celsius. Rainfall in the city averages around 2,400 millimetres
a year34.
The Moratuwa MC consists of 42 GN (Grama Niladhari - Village Officer) divisions. The
population of the MC for the years 2010 to 2015 is as follows.
Table 4-100: Population of Moratuwa MC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population 202,382 NA 167,255 NA 169,630 NA
Source: Divisional Secretariat, Moratuwa

The Moratuwa MC implements solid waste management and sewage treatment activities based
on section 129-131 of the Municipal Council Ordinance (1947), the Public Nuisance Ordinance
(1863) and the Waste Management Statute No. 01 of the Western Provincial Council (2007).

Although there is no plan formulated specifically for SWM of Moratuwa, the MC formulated a
municipal 3-year action plan and a health section action plan. The 3-year action plan covered
some SWM activities such as road cleansing, composting and sludge treatment.
a.3 Organization
33
Based on results of interviews with CPHIs of Moratuwa MC (14 October, 2015).
34
World Meteorological Organization, http://worldweather.wmo.int/en/city.html?cityId=227 (Accessed on 16 November, 2015)
152
In the Moratuwa MC, the Public Health Department is responsible for SWM activities. The
department is headed by the Chief Public Health Inspector (CPHI). Public health inspectors
(PHI) and supervisors (SV) assigned under the CPHI supervise waste collection services and
road cleansing activities by zones. The responsibility of the Public Health Department is the
following:
 Waste collection and transportation;
 Public health activities and measures (dengue fever prevention);
 Road sweeping;
 Public awareness on waste separation; and
 Removal of animal corpses
The Moratuwa MC does not have a TO (Technical Officer) or MOH (Medical Officer of
Health). However, the mechanical engineer is responsible for inspection and maintenance of
tractors and trailers.
The figure below shows the organizational structure and the staff of the Moratuwa MC.
Figure 4-46: Organizational chart of Moratuwa MC
153
Table 4-101: Staff related to SWM in Moratuwa MC

Posts Types Number Note
Engineer 2
SV(Supervisor) Permanent 13
Acting 20
Temporary 118
Driver Permanent 10
Acting 16
Total

The MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan for SWM specifically. However,
daily activities by HPIs and SVs are well-interrelated under the supervision by the CPHI who is
rich in SWM experience; and therefore, the MC can be assumed to not have any difficulties in
staff allocation for implementing SWM activities.
b. Technical System

The Moratuwa MC has been implementing a separate collection system for organic and
inorganic waste since January, 2015. Under this system, buckets were distributed to tax
payers— residents who actually paid their taxes—in order for them to use the buckets when
storing and discharging separated waste. As collection workers do not collect waste that was not
discharged in the designated buckets, the degree of residents’ cooperation has been relatively
high.
Figure 4-47：Example of method of waste separation and storage at a household

The Moratuwa MC implements waste collection and transportation services directly to
households. 26 drivers and 376 workers implement the services under the supervision of PHIs
and SVs.
b.2.1 Collection Method
154
The municipal territory is divided into five collection zones. Waste in the zones is collected
through door-to-door and bell collection methods by four compactor trucks and four tractors
which are dispatched daily.
Figure 4-48: Waste collection zones in Moratuwa MC
The coverage of waste collection services in the MC is 99.9% by area basis. The collection
methods and frequencies are as follows.
Table 4-102: Waste collection methods and frequencies in Moratuwa MC

Collection
Waste type Collection method Note
frequency
Organic Door-to-door Daily
Inorganic waste is collected on
Inorganic Door-to-door Once or twice a
weekends
week
155
b.2.2 Collection Amount

Waste collected in the Moratuwa MC is transported to the Karadiyana DS. According to the
information provided by the disposal site, the amount of collected waste is 72 ton/day.
b.2.3 Collection Fee

The Moratuwa MC does not collect any waste collection fees from households. On the other
hand, they collect fees from large waste generators and those who discharge construction waste.
The waste fee is set for each trip (1,690 LKR per tractor load)
b.2.4 Collection Vehicles

The MC has sufficient collection vehicles to provide collection services to the entire MC. Also,
hand carts are used for primary collection to provide collection services in inaccessible areas.
The following table shows the number of collection vehicles.
Table 4-103: Collection vehicles of Moratuwa MC
Number not in
Number of
Type operation Remarks
vehicles
(average)
Compactor truck (12-14m3) 8 4 Av. 80% of vehicles is
Tractor with trailer 16 4 sitting in the garage and
Dump Truck (3m3) 4 need to be repaired.
Tipper 4
Hand cart 17
Wheel Loader 2
However, most of the collection vehicles have become obsolete and 80% of the fleet is kept in
the garage waiting for maintenance. The following table shows the manufactured year of each
collection vehicle.
Table 4-104: Manufactured year of the collection vehicles
Type of vehicle Vehicle No Model Year of Running condition

manufacture
Compactor 48-6314 NISSAN FE6 1997.01.01 Running
Compactor 226-2024 ISUZU FRR33G 1999.01.21 Running
Compactor 226-0993 ISUZU FRR33G 1999.01.21 Not Running
Tipper (Dump truck) 226-2050 ISUZU NPR66G 1999.01.21 Running
156
Year of
Type of vehicle Vehicle No Model manufacture Running condition
Dump truck LG-1751 MITSUBISHI 2009.01.29 Running

FM617FDHR
MITSUBISHI
Dump truck LG-1752 FM617FDHR 2009.01.29 Running

FM617FDHR
FM617FDHR
Skip Hoist 226-2062 ISUZU FRR33F 1999.01.21 Running
Skip Hoist 226-2063 ISUZU FRR33F 1999.01.21 Running
Tractor 37-5795 M/F240 1986.03.22 Running
Tractor RA-5835 TAFE35DI 2007.01.11 Under repair
Tractor RA-5836 TAFE35DI 2007.01.11 Running
Tractor RA-9792 MAHINDRA 2008.05.02 Running

575DI
MAHINDRA
Tractor RA-9793 575DI 2008.05.02 Running

575DI
575DI
MAHINDRA

575DI
575DI
MAHINDRA

575DI
575DI
157
b.2.5 Methods of Vehicle Maintenance

The Moratuwa MC has its own workshop in their compound where most of the maintenance
and repair works for the municipal vehicles are done.

In 2013, the Waste Management Authority (WMA) assisted construction of a compost facility
at a market of the MC. The compost facility receives organic waste being generated at the
market and produces compost. The current daily processing volume is 1 ton of organic waste.
The facility sells each kg of the produced compost for 12.51 LKR.
The MC assigned three workers for the facility and has been operating the facility in sufficient
sanitary conditions. An observation found that waste around the facility had not scattered, no
bad odour had been generated and almost no complaints had been raised by the surrounding
residents.
The detailed information about the facility is the following.
Table 4-105: An intermediate treatment facility operated by Moratuwa MC
Execution Capacity Constructe
Facility type Location Remarks
body (ton/day) d year
Compost MC (funded Behind No waste scattering and bad
1 2013
facility by WMA) MC market odour
b.4 Karadiyana Final Disposal Site

The Colombo District of the Western Province consists of 13 local authorities. There are three
final disposals sites – the Karadiyana disposal site (Karadiyana DS), the Meethotamulla disposal
site (Meethotamulla DS) and the Kaduwela disposal site (Kaduwela DS) – in the district’s
territory.
Among the disposal sites, the Karadiyana DS is located in the very south of the district and
receives waste from seven local authorities, the National Defence University, the Provincial
Road Development Authority and other MSW transported directly from generation sources. The
disposal site is operated by the WMA of the Western Province.
b.4.1 Overview of the Disposal Site

(1) Location of the Disposal Site
The Karadiyana DS is located in the territory of the Kesbewa UC near its borders with the
Moratuwa MC, the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC and the Boralesgamuwa UC.
158
Figure 4-49: Location map of the Karadiyana DS
(2) Facilities, Equipment and Operation of the Disposal Site

The landfill area at the disposal site consists of three lots (an old and closed lot, a lot currently
being used and a lot to be used in the future). The total area of the site is 37 acres (around 15
Ha).
As for the disposal site facilities, a control house and weighbridge were installed at the entrance
and a compost facility is located to the north of the road that accesses the landfill area. 35 staffs
of the WMA work for the disposal site. The facilities are presented in the table below.
Table 4-106: Facilities of Karadiyana DS

Facilities Intended purpose
1．Office Container offices (3 pcs)
2．Truck scale For measuring received waste
3．Landfill lots For disposal of received waste
For composting organic waste transported through
4．Compost plant
separate collections
5．Sorting facility (MRF) Under construction
In addition to the above, the site possesses the following equipment.
159
Table 4-107: Equipment of Karadiyana DS
Type number Note
Bulldozer 1 Own equipment for landfill work

Backhoe loader 1 Own equipment for landfill work
Dump truck 1 Own equipment for landfill work
Pickup truck 1 Own equipment for supervision
Van 1 Own equipment for workers commuting
Excavator (Leased) 2 Leased equipment for landfill work
Bulldozer (L) 2 Leased equipment for landfill work
Figure 4-50: Plan map of Karadiyana DS
b.4.2 Intermediate Treatment

(1) Compost Plant
As mentioned above, a compost plant with a daily processing capacity of 30 tons of organic
waste is located on the premises of the Karadiyana DS. Although the facility was receiving
organic waste transported from the Moratuwa MC—where separate collection had been
introduced in January 2015—the trommel sieve of the facility later broke down and the WMA
was forced to stop its operation. At the same time, it was decided to improve the facility; and
thus, organic waste received for composting has currently been kept at the side of the facility.
Of the total organic waste coming into the compost plant, around 60% (the water content)
evaporates during composting process, around 10 to 20% becomes (saleable) compost product,
and the rest becomes residue and is transported to the disposal site. Although the WMA was
selling the compost produced at the plant as Mihisaru brand compost, a considerable amount of
stock is being kept at the plant at the moment.
160
Photo: Compost Plant at Karadiyana DS

(2) Recyclable collection by waste pickers
There are 20 organized waste pickers at the Karadiyana DS. The waste pickers collect the types
of recyclables listed below from the waste received at the disposal site. 15% of total revenues of
recyclables are spent by the WMA for purchasing helmets and gloves for the waste pickers.
Table 4-108: The amount of valuable recovery by waste picker
Amount to be collected
Types of recyclables
(ton/week)
Plastic 1
PET 4
Polythene 1
Can 2
Others 2
Total 10
*Based on interview results with Karadiyana DS (25 August, 2015)
(3) Plan for the Karadiyana Waste Management Plaza

There is a plan to construct new facilities at the west side of the entrance of the disposal site to
form the Waste Management Plaza. According to the plan, the facilities listed below will be the
parts that make up the Waste Management Plaza (the existing compost plant and the material
recovery facility that are under construction were included).
Table4-109: Plan for Karadiyana Waste Management Plaza
Project Capacity Remarks
Mass scale Compost Project 30 t/Day
Recycling Project (MRF) 10 t/Day
Waste to Energy Project 750 t/Day (Fresh waste 500 + dumped
(Thermochemical Transformation) waste 250)
Mass Scale Bio Methnization Plant 95 t/Day
(Biochemical Transformation)
161
Figure 4-51: Plan of Karadiyana Waste Management Plaza

According to the WMA, these facilities will be constructed utilizing a Public-Private
Partnership (PPP). If the plan is implemented, all waste to be received at the Karadiyana DS
(600 to 650 ton/day) along with 250 tons of already landfilled waste will be treated daily at
these facilities.
b.4.3 Final Disposal

(1) Disposal Amount
As mentioned above, seven local authorities located around the Karadiyana DS transport their
waste to the site. The disposal amount of each local authority, compiled from the data provided
by the WMA (from October, 2013 to August, 2015), is presented in the table below.
The disposal amounts of the Moratuwa MC for the years 2013 and 2014 occupy 1/4 of the total
disposal amounts of the listed years. However, the total disposal amount of the MC decreased
by roughly 15% since January 2015 due to the introduction of separate collection for organic
and inorganic waste. The reason for the decrease was the delivery of the organic waste to the
compost facility of the Karadiyana DS which was not registered as waste for landfilling.
162
Table 4-110: Amount of waste received at Karadiyana DS for final disposal

2013 2014 2015 (Jan - Aug)
No Benefited Institute Daily Total Daily Total Daily
Rate Rate Rate
(ton/day) (ton/year) (ton/day) (ton/year) (ton/day)
1 Moratuwa M.C. 124.5 25.2% 43,738 119.8 23.1% 17,597 72.4 14.7%
Boralesgamuwa
2 27.3 5.5% 10,209 28.0 5.4% 7,183 29.6 6.0%
U.C.
3 Kesbewa U.C. 48.9 9.9% 19,446 53.3 10.3% 13,480 55.5 11.2%
Dehiwala - Mount
4 157.1 31.8% 60,332 165.3 31.9% 39,073 160.8 32.6%
Lavinia M.C.
Sri
5 Jayewardenapura 37.3 7.5% 13,427 36.8 7.1% 9,285 38.2 7.7%
Kotte M.C.
6 Maharagama U.C. 69.1 14.0% 27,244 74.6 14.4% 18,963 78.0 15.8%
7 Homagama P.S. 22.6 4.6% 11,102 30.4 5.9% 7,019 28.9 5.8%
Government
8 0.9 0.2% 547 1.5 0.3% 1,843 7.6 1.5%
Institution *1
Government
9 0.7 0.1% 2 0.0 0.0% 120 0.5 0.1%
Institution *2
10 Other 6.1 1.2% 3,207 8.8 1.7% 5,456 22.5 4.5%
Total 494.3 100.0% 189,254 518.5 100.0% 120,018 493.9 100.0%
*1: General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, *2: Provincial Road Development Authority
Data source: Waste Management Authority of the Western Province
The Study Team analysed the weighbridge data recorded from January 2015. As a result, it
became known that the amount of total waste received at the Karadiyana DS (including organic
waste and waste transported from generation sources directly to the site) was approximately 600
ton/day and the amount of waste transported from the target local authorities of this study
occupied 64.7% of the total waste.
Table 4-111: Amount of waste received at the Karadiyana DS from January to August,
2015
Jan to Aug, 2015 Daily amount Share in the
Local authorities total received
(ton) (ton/day) Share waste
Moratuwa M.C 25,681.68 105.69 100.0%
MSW 14,752.85 60.71 57.4%
18.7%
Sorted organic waste 8,301.88 34.16 32.3%
Other waste 2,626.95 10.81 10.2%
Kesbewa U.C 15,025.59 61.83 100.0%
MSW 14,595.14 60.06 97.1%
11.0%
Sorted organic waste 17.19 0.07 0.1%
Other waste 413.26 1.70 2.8%
Dehiwala-Mt Lavinia M.C 48,018.04 197.61 100.0%
MSW 43,014.26 177.01 89.6%
35.0%
Sorted organic waste 17.54 0.07 0.0%
Other waste 4,986.24 20.52 10.4%
Total 137,013.56 563.84 100.0%
MSW 118,310.68 486.88 86.3%
100%
Sorted organic waste 8,603.18 35.40 6.3%
Other waste 10,099.7 41.56 7.4%
Data source: Weighbridge data provided by WMA
(2) Landfill Operation
The disposal activity at the Karadiyana DS is considered as controlled dumping since the site
163
identifies received waste and regulates landfill by types of waste. The site is located in a swale
area and the waste has been piled up on a peat layer. The waste is being covered by soil and no
leachate collection and treatment facilities are installed. As the access road to the waste
discharge area is not well-maintained, collection vehicles often get stuck in mud and suffer
damage when it rains, according to local authorities.
According to the WMA, the Karadiyana DS is considered to be the only site in Sri Lanka where
O & M is being implemented properly. According to their reports, the value of BOD calculated
from the surrounding water is usually in the three digit range; and thus, the quality of the
surrounding water is good. However, it is considered that the low value for BOD has been a
result of dilution caused by rain water. There is also a possibility of groundwater pollution.

The issues identified in the technical system of the Karadiyana DS can be summarized as
follows:
(1) Insufficiency of basic infrastructures
The basic infrastructures of disposal sites (enclosing dam, access road, etc.) in the Karadiyana
DS have not been sufficient. In order to control impacts on environments in surrounding areas, a
disposal site must be isolated from the surrounding areas. As for the Karadiyana DS, access
from the west side of the site is blocked by a water body. However, the site can be accessed
easily from its east side since no water exists on its east side.
As the road in the disposal site is in bad condition, collection vehicles cannot reach to the
landfill when it rains. It was also reported that collection vehicles are often damaged due to bad
road conditions.
The Karadiyana DS is located in the southern part of the Colombo Metropolitan territory and
the surrounding areas are being developed. Therefore, the disposal site has been required to
implement stricter environmental considerations. It is advisable that the WMA create a model of
an advanced final disposal management system in Sri Lanka based on the Karadiyana DS.
(2) Insufficiency of financial resources for implementation of proper landfill operation
The operation expenses of the Karadiyana DS are financed from the revenues collected as
tipping fees. The tipping fee set by the WMA for MSW of the local authorities is 500 LKR/ton
(around 3.5 USD, tax included). In order to promote waste reduction, the WMA decreased the
fee to 250 LKR/ton (tax included) for separated organic waste.
However, the above fee is not sufficient for financing proper operation of the disposal site. At
the same time, the disposal site fees must finance the operational expenses of the compost plant;
and therefore, ensuring sufficient financial resources is essential for implementing a proper
sanitary landfill.
(3) Sustainability of the intermediate treatment facilities
The WMA has been promoting separation collections of organic waste in local authorities to
reduce the landfill amount through composting. To create an incentive for the local authorities,
the WMA decreased the tipping fee by 50% for separated organic waste. However, operational
costs of composting will be more than those of landfilling; and thus, the WMA is required to
ensure sufficient financial resources in order to maintain the operation of the compost plant.
Moreover, the WMA has been expanding the capacity of the compost plant based on the
expectation that the amount of separated organic waste would increase. However, distribution
channels for compost to be produced at the plant have not been established and it has been an
issue for sustainability of the compost plant.
164

The Moratuwa MC introduced source separation in all its areas in January, 2015 and has been
implementing separate collection services. In relation to the introduction of source separation in
Moratuwa, the WMA and the MC committed budgets of 2.25 million LKR and 7.55 million
LKR respectively and purchased 45,000 buckets (with a capacity of 20 liters each) for storing
organic waste. The buckets were distributed only to residents who actually paid their taxes. The
MC decided not to collect waste if the waste is not discharged in these buckets. Therefore, the
number of residents who is coming to the MC to pay their taxes is contributing to the increase
of the tax collection rate.

The Moratuwa MC does not support dissemination of home composters. Moreover, the
incentive to do home composting is considered to be low because the coverage area of waste
collection services is high and it is a large commercial area.

According to interview surveys, five middleman shops that trade recyclables exist in the
territory of Moratuwa on the way to the Karadiyana DS. The Study Team conducted an
interview with one of these shops. As the interview reveals, most of the recyclables that the
shop purchases are brought in by collection workers from the Moratuwa MC. The collection
workers pick the recyclables while collecting waste. The results of the interview are
summarized in the table below.
Table 4-112: Information of recyclable trading by the middleman shop
Purchasing
Amount Selling price
Types of recyclables price Destination Remarks
(ton/day) (LKR/kg)
(LKR/kg)
Plastic 0.2 25 40 Recycler
PET Plastic
0.06 10 15
Recycler(Piliandara)
Polythene 0.02 10 15 Recycler@Moratuwa
Metal 1 Metals other
0.15 20 30 Middleman
than “Metal2”
Metal 2 0.2 10 15 Middleman Cans
Glass - - -
Cardboard 0.35 10 16 Middleman
Newspaper - - -
Paper Mainly used
0.2 5 8 Middleman
book
Coconut Shell 0.25 5 8 Middleman
＊Based on the interview with Middleman Shop owner (2 November, 2015)
165
Photo: A middlemen shop near the Karadiyana DS

As mentioned above, collection workers earn additional income by collecting and selling
recyclables. Since the tipping fee for separated organic waste is 50% cheaper than that for
unseparated waste (but free of charge from November 2015), the MC started paying 100
LKR/day to each worker as an incentive for implementing separate collection from the cost
saved after introduction of the separate collection (350,000LKR was already paid as an
incentive at the time of the survey).

The Moratuwa MC is the only local authority in Sri Lanka that introduced separate collection
services in all its areas. The manner and quality of waste separation at generation sources have
been improving gradually. The distribution of buckets to residents for separating organic waste
contributed to the establishment of a system that supports the residents in cooperating on
implementation of source separation and separate collection services.
d. Public Awareness

In the Moratuwa MC, public awareness activities are being implemented to promote
implementation of separate collection services in all its areas. The summary of these activities
are presented in the following table.
Table 4-113: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Moratuwa MC
Execution body The MC with support from the MSWMSC and the WMA
Title Promotion of source separation
Source of Budget MC
Approved Budget
Explanation of source separation and monitoring of bucket utilization by visiting
households during preventive activities for dengue fever to be implemented by the
Implementation
Dengue Control Unit (15 workers X 50 households/day).
Methods
Distribution of leaflets
Public announcements
In addition to above, the PHIs organize environmental education at schools such as organizing
“School Health Activity” and awareness of waste separation in cooperation with the School
Health Club.
166

It can be considered that the degree of residents’ awareness toward waste separation is relatively
high in Moratuwa when compared to other local authorities since the MC introduced the
separate collection services earlier. Complaints about residents’ waste discharging manners are
quite few in numbers.

The Moratuwa MC has already been implementing various awareness activities. However, it is
necessary to strengthen public awareness activities to increase residents’ cooperation on source
separation and quality of the waste separation.
e. Finance
e.1 Financial Condition of the Municipal Council

The financial data of the Moratuwa MC for the past three years are presented in the table below.
According to the table, the financial results of the municipal council have been positive for the
years concerned and the difference between the total revenues and expenditures accounted for
11% of the annual revenues on average.
Table 4-114: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 580,411 581,209 737,328 632,983
2 Actual
Revenue 481,882 531,127 712,151 575,053 100.0%
Grant 273,747 280,454 415,306 323,169 56.2%
Expenditure 468,790 479,712 465,243 471,248 81.9%
Recurrent 404,412 433,382 461,245 433,013 75.3%
Capital 64,378 46,331 3,997 38,235 6.6%
Profit or loss 13,093 51,414 246,908 103,805 18.1%
Source: Moratuwa MC, “Programme Budget: 2014 to 2016”
As the table below shows, the total amount of grants received from the central government and
the provincial council for the last three years occupied more than 50% of the total annual
revenues (56% on average) and the percentage of revenue that it obtains independently
(hereinafter, own-source revenue) is relatively small. However, the majority of the grants were
block grants received from the central government for financing salaries and allowances of
municipal staffs (39% of the total municipal revenues on average); and therefore, the MC can be
considered as a municipality that does not depend on government grants.
Although the capital grants increased to 170 million LKR in 2014, the amount in the previous
two years was around one-third of the total grants.
Among the own-source revenues, the property tax and other revenues were the major types
since they occupy 15% and 19% of the total municipal revenues respectively.
167
Table 4-115: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Revenues (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Rates & Taxes 94,492 84,716 82,163 87,124 15.2%
Rents 12,126 13,064 11,016 12,069 2.1%
License 17,699 13,810 12,832 14,780 2.6%
Other Income 59,844 106,456 166,014 110,772 19.3%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 208,520 224,785 240,983 224,763 39.1%
Salaries 204,425 221,927 238,201 221,518 38.5%
Capital Grants 65,227 55,668 174,322 98,406 17.1%
Total Grants 273,747 280,454 415,306 323,169 56.2%
Total 481,882 531,127 712,151 575,053 100.0%
The table below shows the dynamics of the annual expenditures of the Moratuwa MC.
According to the table, the recurrent and capital expenditures account for 92% and 7% of the
annual municipal expenditures on average.
Table 4-116: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Averages
000 LKR %
Personnel Emoluments 279,015 284,331 322,940 295,429 62.7%
Travelling 9,114 4,896 4,312 6,107 1.3%
Requisites and Equipment 59,970 61,517 72,018 64,501 13.7%
Repairs and Maintenance of Capital
18,979 30,333 25,669 24,994 5.3%
Assets
30,692 27,599 27,951 28,747 6.1%
and Other services
Interest 2,754 20,311 3,962 9,009 1.9%
Grants, Subsidies and Contributions 732 1,220 1,049 1,000 0.2%
Pensions, retirements, benefits and
3,156 3,175 3,345 3,225 0.7%
gratuities
Other expenditures 0.0%
Although the total capital expenditures equalled to 98% of the annual total grants received from
the central government and the provincial council in 2012, the amount decreased to 83% in
2013 and 2.3% in 2014. This implies that the capital grants received in 2014 were not expended
within the year; and therefore, it can be assumed that the difference between the total revenues
and expenditures for the year (250 million LKR) included the amount of grants that had not
been expended at the end of the year.
e.2 SWM Finance

As the table below shows, SWM expenditures in the Moratuwa MC exceeded the budgeted
annual expenses and occupied 27 to 33% of the total municipal expenditures.
168
Table 4-117: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand LKR)
B Actual SWM Revenues (Collected Waste Fees) 2,310 13,054 8,511
C Actual SWM Expenditures:
2 Supplies And Material Expenditures:
Equipment For Disposing Garbage
Uniforms for Workers
Boots for Workers
Awareness Program
Other supplies 1,433 1,022 2,239
3 Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 10,144 1,875 603
4 Final Disposal Payment 19,243 9,327 15,713
5 Other Expenses 1,671 1,291 955
Total SWM Expenditures 142,616 128,360 151,508
Total Collection Costs 123,373 119,033 135,795
Disposal Costs 19,243 9,327 15,713
Collected waste (ton/year) - 45,442.5 43,738.0
SWM costs per ton (LKR/ton) - 2,824.7 3,464.0
Collection costs per ton (LKR/ton) - 2,824.7 3,104.7
Disposal costs per ton (LKR/ton) - 205.2 359.3
Share of Collected Fees in the Total Expenditure 1.6% 10.2% 5.6%
The amount of collected waste fees for all three years was low, with 2013 being the highest –
equalling 10% of the SWM annual expenses for the year. – While the other two years amounted
to less than 6% of the SWM annual expenses. As the amount of collected fees is usually small,
the waste collection expenses are being paid from other revenues of the municipality.
The main reason for the low fee collection rates is that the municipality collects waste fees only
from large-scale businesses despite implementing waste collection services to all generation
sources. At the same time, the large-scale businesses are those that generate a daily amount of
waste that is equal to half of a tractor trailer bed. In addition, the designation of what constitutes
a “large-scale business” is usually decided based on the personal judgement of individual public
health inspectors. Therefore, the number of businesses that are paying waste fees are very few
(525 businesses were registered as payers as of the end of October 2015).
The list of waste fees that the municipality has been collecting from large-scale businesses is
shown in the table below.
Table 4-118: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included), Unit: LKR/load**
No Types of Waste With Tax
1 Municipal Solid Waste 1,368.00
2 Construction and Garden Waste 1,710.00
3 Slaughtering Waste 2,280.00
4 Industrial Waste 2,850.00
5 Industrial Chemical Waste 3,534.00
6 Soil and Dirt 3,534.00
*-Tax rates: Nation building tax-2%, VAT-12%; **-Load: a load of a tractor

The major problem identified in the SWM Financial System of the Moratuwa MC is the
irrelevance between the waste collection expenses and the revenues from the waste fee. Like
169
other local authorities, the municipality focuses on the total amounts of expenditures and the
own-source revenues only and does not consider the sustainability of individual public services
such as waste collection. Therefore, efforts to increase the waste fee revenue are not sufficient.
Although large-scale businesses were defined as those that generate a daily amount of waste that
is equal to half a tractor trailer, it is difficult to identify the actual amount of waste being
discharged by the businesses. At the same time, waste collection fees are set for a tractor trailer
load. Since the amount of waste fees that a business has to pay is difficult to identify, the
municipality has to negotiate payments with businesses before collecting waste fees.

The waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate identified
during SATREPS in November 2012 and the number of generation sources obtained through a
survey conducted by local consultants. The results revealed that the generation rate of municipal
solid waste (MSW) is 727 g/person/day.
Table 4-119: Waste Generation Amount of Moratuwa MC (2015)
sources (ton/day)
Hotels (large) 1,000.00 Kg/(hotel) 0 0.0
Hotels (middle & small) 56.00 Kg/(hotel) 99 5.5
Non-organic shops (middle) 15.00 Kg/(shop) 123 1.8
Other institutions 9.17 Kg/(institution) 372 3.4
Other educational institutions 8.00 Kg/(institution) 72 0.6
Institutions
Market 3,000.00 Kg/(public market) 8 24.0
Industries 380.00 Kg/(industry) 0 0.0
Total 124.5
Source: Generation Rate of MSW – Reports of SATREPS; Waste Generation Sources – JICA Survey
Results of a waste composition survey implemented by local consultants at the Karadiyana DS
between 15 and 21 October under this study are presented in the table below.
170
Table4-120: Waste Composition of Moratuwa MC (2015)

Category Rate
Kitchen waste 52.5%
Paper 13.6%
Textiles 4.3%
Grass & wood 14.1%
Soft Plastics 9.1%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
Metal 0.7%
Other 0.1%
100.0%
4.7.4 Results of Public Opinion Survey

97% of the surveyed households are Sinhalese, 1% is Muslims, 1% is Tamils and 1% other.
Data on the average number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the table
below.
Table4-121: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size
High 50 4.5 85, 200
Middle 50 4.1 48, 375
Low 50 4.0 27, 140
Business 37 3.9 602, 200
Item No.of Sample %

Yes 147 97
No 3 3
Total 150 100
Figure 4-52: Availability of garbage collection service in the Moratuwa MC
In Moratuwa MC, 100% of surveyed households are provided with a garbage collection service,
of which 97% stated they use this service. Only 44% of surveyed households are “very satisfied”
with the present SWM service provision, while 34% are “somewhat satisfied”.
171
No.of
Item %
Sample
Other 5 3
Irrelevant 45 30
Total 150 100
Figure 4-53: Method of garbage discharge by residence in MMC area
 Households ‘main methods of waste discharge are shown in upper Figure. The most
(53%) and carrying garbage to the collection truck (11%).
stated that they received the service 2-3 times a week. Similarly, 49% discharge their
garbage 2-3 times per week, 22% as soon as it is generated and 28 % discharge their
garbage daily.
inorganic waste at the source of generation. Only 2% of surveyed households are not/less
willing to cooperate with source separation for recycling. The rest of the households are
very much willing (55%) and somewhat willing (10%) to cooperate in the source separated
 Further, 84% of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or someone
system is well established in the Moratuwa MC area.
collection system
Item No.of Sample %
Doing
already
33% Less willing 2 1
Not willing 2 1
Very much
Doing already 50 33
willing
55% Total 150 100
Not willing
1%
Less willing
1% Somewhat
willing
10%

collection system in the Moratuwa MC
172
 Only 11% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and use the
 Not many surveyed households (70%) have never discussed proper garbage discharge
stated “somewhat necessary”. Only 7% of surveyed households stated that awareness
 61% of households do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue tax
they paid for MMC. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is
 Out of all surveyed households, 31% stated that they sell/give-away glass & bottles for
recycling and 30% of residences sell/give-away plastics for recycling. Also, 14% of
households sell/ give-away cans & metal for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
4.7.5 Waste Flow
survey, statistical data collection and census results. It should be noted that the Moratuwa MC
started separate collection services for organic and inorganic waste in January 2015 based on an
order by the Mayor. Therefore, separate collection was considered in preparation of the waste
flow.
According to the waste flow, the waste collection rate ([discharged amount + directly
transported amount] / [generation amount]) is 71.0%. The recycling rates, estimated from the
generation amount, are 14.1% for composting and 3.1% for material recovery. The total
recycling rate is 17.3%. Although the indicator is relatively high when comparing to those of
other local authorities, further improvements of waste treatment are necessary since the amounts
of self-disposal such as burning waste at generation sources and illegally dumped waste account
for 12.9% of the generation amount.
1. Waste generation
124.5 t/d
(100.0%)
13% reduction by source separation
2. Organic waste 3. Other waste 6. Direct haulage

30.2 t/d 54.2 t/d 7.7 t/d
(24.3%) (43.5%) (6.2%)
9. On-site compost 15. On-site recycling
1.4 t/d 1.2 t/d
(1.1%) (1.0%)
4. Self disposal 7. Collection-1 11. Collection-2
12.8 t/d 27.1 t/d 52.8 t/d
(10.3%) (21.8%) (42.4%)
16. Recycling (1)
1.4 t/d
(1.1%)
10. Off-site compost 8. Compost plant 12. MRF 17. Off-site recycling
16.3 t/d 27.1 t/d 51.5 t/d 0.0 t/d
(13.1%) (21.8%) (41.4%) (0.0%)
Composting 18. Recycling (2)

17.6 t/d 19. Residue 1.3 t/d
5. Illegal dumping 2.1 t/d (1.0%)
3.2 t/d 13. Landfill
(2.6%) 60.5 t/d
(48.6%)
Material Recovery
20. Remove 3.9 t/d
1.5 t/d 14. Final Disposal
62.7 t/d
(50.4%)
Karadiyana DS
Recycling (1): Recyclables tak en by the collection work ers

Recycling (2): Recyclables tak en by the waste pick ers at landfill site
Figure 4-55: Waste Flow of Moratuwa MC (2015)
173

Waste that is considered as industrial waste is not generated in the territory of the Moratuwa
MC. However, the MC collects general waste to be discharged from large-generators such as
factories as long as it receives a request of collection from these generators.

Collection service for medical waste is not implemented. Only general waste discharged by
hospitals is being collected.

The generation amount of night soil in the Moratuwa MC is 14.4 m3/day

Night soil is collected by two vacuum trucks with capacities of 1.8 m3 and 3.0 m3. Each truck
conducts three trips daily.
c.3 Tipping Fee

Collected night soil is treated at a treatment plant operated by the National Water Supply and
Drainage Board. The tipping fee is 450 LKR/load (tax excluded).
4.7.7 Solid Waste Management Needs
a.1 Establishment of Proper Solid Waste Management System

As the Moratuwa MC is an urbanized municipality located in the suburbs of the Colombo
Metropolitan Area, illegal dumping and self-disposal of waste have great impacts on residents’
living environment. Therefore, the current waste collection rate in the Moratuwa MC (74%) can
be considered to be low. In addition, the amount of organic waste collected through separate
collection services has not reached the expected level in spite of the introduction of separate
collections in all areas of the MC.
It is necessary to improve the current SWM system by increasing collection efficiency and
residents’ participation in implementation of SWM activities.
a.2 Promotion of 3R
According to the results of WACS, the share of organic waste (kitchen waste and green waste)
is 66.6% (82.9 ton/day) in the total generation amount. However, the amount of organic waste
collected through separate collection services is 30.2 ton/day, which is less than half of the
organic waste being generated in the MC. The share of collected recyclables in the total
generation amount is small, usually equalling up to only 3.1%.
When considering the limited capacity of the Karadiyana DS and transportation costs, waste
reduction is an inevitable objective for the MC.
174
b. Organizational and Institutional Improvement
b.1 Formulation of Solid Waste Management Plan

The SWM in the Moratuwa MC is struggling to maintain the current conditions. Therefore, no
improvement plans were formulated and even budget implementation is conducted without any
plans. As a SWM policy based on future predictions is required, the MC should prepare a
master plan for its SWM.
Presently, the MC is transporting their waste to the Karadiyana DS operated by the WMA.
However, the MC ought to recognize its responsibilities for the waste generated in its territories;
and therefore, it is preferable that the MC makes clear its roles related to the operation of the
disposal site when formulating its SWM Master Plan.
175
4.8 Kesbewa Urban Council in Western Province

Kesbewa is a town in the Colombo District in the Western Province of Sri Lanka. It is situated
south of Sri Lanka’s largest city, Colombo, and east of Moratuwa. It is on the road that connects
Horana to Colombo. The total area is 41 km2. The urban council is located in Piliyandala Town.
Photo：Kesbewa Urban Council

The main industries of Kesbewa are the garment and agriculture industries (rice and rubber
plantation)35.
The main ethnic and religious group of Kesbewa is Sinhala-Buddhist.
Colombo's climate is fairly temperate all throughout the year. From March to April the average
maximum temperature is around 31 degrees Celsius. The only major change in Colombo’s
weather occurs during the monsoon seasons from May to August and October to January. This
is the time of year where heavy rains can be expected. Colombo sees a relatively small diurnal
temperature range, although this is more marked in the drier winter months, where minimum
temperatures average 22 degrees Celsius. Rainfall in the city averages around 2,400 millimetres
a year36.
The Kesbewa UC (Urban Council) has 55 GNs (Grama Niladhari –Village Officer) divisions
and is constituted by exactly 55 Wards. The population trend from 2010-2015 of the Kesbewa
UC is as follows.
Table4-122: Population Trend of Kesbewa UC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015(Sept.)
Population 168,882 170,908 184,675 184,359 191,334 NA
Source: Divisional Secretariat, Kesbewa

The Kesbewa UC implements solid waste management and sewage treatment activities based
on section 118-120 of the Urban Council Ordinance No. 61 (1939) and the Public Nuisance
35
Based on the interview with CPHI of Kesbewa UC (October 22, 2015)
36
World Meteorological Organization http://worldweather.wmo.int/en/city.html?cityId=227 (Viewed on November 15, 2015)
176
Ordinance (1863).

The UC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM.
a.3 Organization
In the Kesbewa UC, the Health Section is in charge of solid waste management. The head of the
Health Section is the Chief Public Health Inspector (CPHI), which is assisted by the PHI and
Supervisor. They supervise road sweeping and waste collection services in each zone. The role
of the Health Section is as follows:
 Public health activities (Dengue)
 Road sweeping
 Public awareness of waste separation
In the Kesbewa UC, there are neither Technical Officers (TO) nor Medical Officers of Health
(MOH). Furthermore, there are no engineers as there is no workshop for collection vehicles.
The following figure shows the organizational structure and the staff of the Kesbewa UC.
Figure 4-56: Organizational chart of SWM section in Kesbewa UC
177
Table4-123: Staff related to SWM in Kesbewa UC

Engineer 0
Temporary 41
Driver 14
Total 129

The Kesbewa UC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM.
With regard to organization, the experienced CPHI has taken actual command of waste
management and is working in close collaboration with the PHI and the SV. However, there are
very few collection workers.
b. Technical System

In the Kesbewa UC, the separate collection system was implemented with the support of the Waste
Management Authority (WMA) in 13 GNs in 2012. However, when the WMA stopped the
support, the participation rate decreased. Currently only 1 GN continues separate collection and
only 6% of the population participates in waste separation.
Residents are instructed to put waste in plastic bag(s) and place it on the designated collection
point(s) on the roadside on the designated collection day(s).

The Kesbewa UC directly collects and transports waste from the households. Under the
supervision of the PHI and the SV, 14 collection drivers and 105 collection workers (including
temporary workers) collect waste.

In a separate collection area, waste is separated into organic and other waste. In the other area,
waste is mixed. The collection area is divided into five zones and the night collection area as
follows.
178
Figure 4-57: Collection area by zones in Kesbewa UC (as of Nov. 2015)

Collection coverage of the UC is 60% by area basis. The remaining 20% is on-site treatment
and 20% is illegal dumping. The following table shows the collection method and frequency of
waste.
179
Table4-124: Waste collection methods and frequency of Kesbewa UC

Main road Mixed waste Collection point Everyday
Other than main road Mixed waste Collection point Once/week
Organic waste Collection point Once/week
Separate collection area
Other waste Collection point Once/month
Photo：Waste collection by tractor

Waste collected by the Kesbewa UC is transported to the Karadiyana DS, according to the truck
scale installed in the DS (Disposal Site); collection volume is 54 ton/day.

The Kesbewa UC does not collect any waste collection fees from households. On the other hand,
they collect fees by volume from large waste generators depending on the type of waste.
Table4-125: Collection fee of Kesbewa UC
Target Type of waste Fee(LKR/ton) Remarks

Household General waste Free
Large generator General waste 3,420
Includes tire and debris
Large generator Bulky waste 4,560
etc.
Collected from garment
Large generator Textile waste 6,840
factory

The following table shows the number of collection vehicles belonging to the UC.
180
Table4-126: Collection vehicles of Kesbewa UC

Number not in
Type of vehicles Number operation Remarks
(average)
Compactor truck (12-14m3) 1 1 Currently broken down so the
UC has to hire a compactor for
6,000LKR/day
Tractor with trailer 12 1
2-wheel Tractor with trailer 3
Hand cart 4
Three wheeler 1
One compactor (made in China in 2009) is currently broken down so the UC has to hire a
compactor truck for 6,000LKR per day without fuel. The tractors with trailers were made
between 1991 (oldest), and 2015 (newest)—donated by MoLG & PC)—while the others were
manufactured about 10 years ago.
The UC keeps the driving record of each vehicle including mileage and collection areas
covered.
b.2.5 Maintenance Methods of Collection Vehicles

The Kesbewa UC has neither workshop nor mechanical engineer, therefore it outsources repairs
to an external repair shop. Regarding the approval process of purchasing spare parts and repair
work, if the purchase or repair work costs less than 5,000 LKR, the approval of the secretary is
needed. For purchase(s) or repair(s) less than 10,000 LKR, the chairman’s approval is necessary,
and for purchases over 10,000 LKR, the Council’s approval is necessary.
Other than simple changing of tyres, tubes or spare parts, the aforementioned approval
processes are required, which takes time. Therefore, it is most likely to interfere with waste
collection service(s).

In the Kesbewa UC, there is one recycling center where recyclables are sorted and stored after
being collected separately (source separation). The other waste collected from about 8,000
households in a separate collection area is transported here and valuable materials are selected
by two sorting workers. Sorted valuables are purchased by a selected buyer through bidding
every six months. They earn about 150,000LKR per year and 50% of sales go to the UC, the
remaining 50% is shared among collection workers and sorting workers.
Table 4-127: Intermediate treatment facilities in Kesbewa UC
Year of
Execution Capacity
Type Address establishmen
body (ton/day)
t
SAMPATH KENDRAYA
Recycling 1 two-wheel tractor
UC collecting center in 2008
Center load/day
Madapatha
*Based on the interview with Officer of Kesbewa UC
181
Photo：Recycling Center
b.4 Final Disposal

Since the waste of the Kesbewa UC is transported and disposed in the Karadiyana DS, please
refer to section b.4 Karadiyana DS of 4.7 Moratuwa MC.

Regarding collection and transportation, collection workers and collection vehicles are
insufficient with collection services covering only 60% (of the Kesbewa UC). The UC
outsources the repair works of collection vehicles because there are neither engineers nor
workshops. If collection vehicles have problems it will take a long time to go through the whole
approval processes and this will affect the collection service.
As for the recycling facilities, it is necessary for the UC to recycle a larger amount of valuables
by increasing the waste separation rate. The sorted valuables are currently stored for six months
and sold to the recyclers but it is possible to increase the recycling rate if the storage space can
be secured by increasing the frequency of sales.

In the Kesbewa UC, separate collection had been introduced in 13GNs out of all the 55GNs in
2012 but to date only 1GN still continues.
We did not find any community recycling systems or recycling activities initiated by NGOs.

The Kesbewa UC has distributed home compost bins (350L) for 5,000 households with a
subsidy of 1,500LKR/pc (original cost 4,000LKR/pc) since 2008 for the purpose of stopping
collection services of organic waste. However, the UC still continues to provide collection
services due to political reasons.

There are some middleman shops that buy and sell valuable materials in the Kesbewa UC. We
conducted an interview with one of these shops. The summary of the interview is shown below.
182
Table 4-128: Purchase of valuable materials at a Middleman Shop

Collection
Type of amount Buying price Selling price
Destination Remarks
Valuables (LKR/kg) (LKR/kg)
（ton/day）
Plastic 0.2 20 40 Plastic
PET 0.1 10 15 PET Recycler
Polythene 0.02 10 20 Recycler
Metal 1 0.15 20 25 Middleman
Metal 2 0.25 15 20 Middleman
Glass 1 3 4 Ceylon glass company
Cardboard 0.3 10 15 Middleman
Paper - - - -
Coconut Shell 0.25 5 10 Middleman
＊Based on the interview with Middleman Shop owner

In the Kesbewa UC, separate collection was once introduced but failed. Currently expansion is
again being planned. Firstly, it is important to encourage source separation, then to establish a
system (effective, hygienic storage and discharge method, setting a separate collection date and
time, providing reliable collection services, etc.) that can be easily understood and adopted by
residents.
d. Public Awareness

In the Kesbewa UC, public awareness activities to promote source separation have been
initiated by the WMA since 2009. At that time, the WMA promised not to collect tipping fees
for organic waste. However, they still continued to collect tipping fees despite their promise,
which discouraged people to participate in waste separation. Currently only 1 GN continues
separate collection.
Table 4-129: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Kesbewa UC
UC
Execution body
(Supported by the WMA and CEA)
Title “Pivithurupura Waste Separation Project”（2009～） initiated by WMA
Budget source UC
2000,000LKR（2015） *not only for SWM activities but for all public welfare
Budget amount
activities
Public announcement
Methods Distribution of leaflet of waste separation
Community meeting

Only 6% of total residents participate in source separation so the level of cooperation is low.
The UC receives many complaints from those who do not receive collection services and there
are many requests for house-to-house collection services.

In the Kesbewa UC, the level of cooperation for waste separation is low. Therefore, it is
183
essential to set the discharging rules (target waste for separation, collection date, discharge point,
and discharge method) in order for residents to easily understand. It is also necessary to
implement environmental education in schools and public organizations.
e. Finance

According to the table below, the difference between annual revenues and expenditures of the
Kesbewa Urban Council (Kesbewa UC) has been positive for the past three years and its share
in total annual revenues is 16% on average.
Table 4-130: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Averages
No Category 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 232,061 286,078 342,662 286,934
2 Actual
Revenue 272,855 301,386 503,858 359,366 100.0%
Grant 87,755 74,039 247,759 136,518 38.0%
Expenditure 209,253 299,887 391,552 300,231 83.5%
Recurrent 118,774 156,464 155,078 143,439 39.9%
Capital 90,480 143,422 236,474 156,792 43.6%
Profit or loss 63,602 1,499 112,306 59,135 16.5%
Source: Kesbewa UC, “Programme Budget: 2014～2015”
The own-source revenues occupy a relatively big share in the total municipal revenues (62% on
average) and this amount exceeds that of the total recurrent expenditures. Therefore, the urban
council can be considered as a local authority with a stable financial capability.
Table 4-131: Breakdowns of the Annual Revenues (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Rates & Taxes 37,341 34,898 37,606 36,615 10.2%
Rents 12,062 10,337 11,156 11,185 3.1%
License 3,200 3,063 4,600 3,621 1.0%
Other Income 111,938 161,441 185,785 153,054 42.6%
2 Grants: 0.0%
Recurrent Grant: 35,134 36,346 51,636 41,038 11.4%
Salaries 33,319 34,934 50,332 39,528 11.0%
Council Members Allowances 1,190 972 824 995 0.3%
Other Recurrent Grant 625 441 480 515 0.1%
Capital Grants 52,622 37,693 196,123 95,479 26.6%
Total Grants 87,755 74,039 247,759 136,518 38.0%
Total 272,855 301,386 503,857 359,367 100.0%
Among the total grants, the amount of the block grants received from the central government
makes up less than 50% and the rest are capital grants.
On the other hand, the capital expenditure makes up more than 50% of the total expenditure
(52% on average) and the amounts of the capital expenditures exceeded those of the capital
grants for each year of the concerned period. According to sources at the urban council, the
184
difference between the above was paid from the own-source revenues and loans released by the
Local Loan and Development Fund.
Table 4-132: Breakdowns of the Annual Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 965 1,161 1,464 1,197 0.4%
21,673 45,487 67,025 44,729 14.9%
Assets
31,311 25,950 16,804 24,688 8.2%
and Other services
Interest 1,128 3,213 3,680 2,674 0.9%
Grants, Subsidies and Contributions 3,727 6,727 5,840 5,431 1.8%
217 217 161 198 0.1%
gratuities
Other expenditures
According to financial data provided by the Kesbewa UC, the urban council has not been facing
financial problems in implementing its daily activities. However, the financial capability of the
urban council is insufficient for improving the quality of public services; and therefore, the
council has to rely on external financial sources such as grants and Local Loan Development
Fund for investments related to the improvement of service quality.
e.2 SWM Finance

The SWM expenses of the Kesbewa UC for the last three years are presented in the table below.
The annual totals of the SWM expenses occupy 9% to 14% of the total expenditures of the
urban council and this is a small amount in comparison with those of other local authorities.
Table 4-133: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand
LKR)
B Actual SWM Revenues (Collected Waste Fees) 372 1,226 3,043
Uniforms for Workers 4 250
Boots for Workers
Awareness Program
3 Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 1,818 2,498 2,956
4 Final Disposal Payment 5,217 6,251
5 Other Expenses 11,774 5,051 19,956

185
The amount of total collected waste fees increased each year. In particular, the increase in 2014
was considerable, reaching double the amount of the previous year. However, the revenues from
the waste fees is still at a level that cannot even finance 8% of the total SWM expenses; and
therefore, the urban council has been financing the expenses from its other own-source
revenues.
Like other local authorities, the waste fees are collected only from big-scale businesses and
these businesses are identified based on the personal judgements of the public health inspectors
of the urban council.
The table of fees is as follows.
Table 4-134: List of Waste Fees (Tax* Included), Unit: LKR/ton
No Types of Waste With Tax
1 Municipal Solid Waste 3420.00
2 Bulky Waste 4560.00
3 Slaughtering and Industrial Waste 6840.00
*Tax rates: Nation building tax-2%, VAT-12%

The major problem identified in the SWM financial system of the Kesbewa UC is the lack of
relevance between the waste collection expenses and the revenues from the waste fee. Like
other local authorities, the urban council focuses on the total amounts of expenditures and the
own-source revenues only and does not consider the sustainability of individual public services
such as waste collection. Therefore, it lacks in efforts to increase the revenues of waste fees.
The definition for big-scale businesses that have to pay waste fees is not officially determined.
At the same time, no monitoring or examinations for identifying big-scale businesses are
implemented so the actual fee collection rate is not known. The urban council does not put forth
effort to increase the revenues of waste fees.
As waste collection fees are set per ton of discharged waste, the urban council has to negotiate
the amounts of the actual payments since identifying the amount of discharged waste by each
individual business is impossible.

The waste generation amount, of which the commercial source is revised, was calculated based
on the waste generation rate obtained by SATREPS in November 2012 and waste generation
units obtained by a locally outsourced survey. The results revealed that the municipal waste
generation rate is 487g/person/day.
186
Table 4-135: Waste Generation Amount of Kesbewa UC (2015)

Generat
1 ion Generation
Source Generation rate*
sources (ton/day)
*2
188,3
Residential Collection 0.390 Kg/person/day 73.5
50
Organic-shops (small) 1.43 Kg/(shop) 1,175 1.7
Institutions
Market 900.00 Kg/(public market) 2 1.8
Total 91.8
*1： 30% of waste generation rate of SATREPS report（20% for commercial waste）
*2： Waste generation is based on JICA survey
The results of the locally outsourced survey on waste composition conducted from 15 to 21
October at the Karadiyana Disposal Site are shown below.
Table 4-136: Waste Composition of Kesbewa UC (2015)
Category Rate
Kitchen waste 52.5%
Paper 13.6%
Textiles 4.3%
Grass & wood 14.1%
Soft Plastics 9.1%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
Metal 0.7%
Other 0.1%
52.5%
Source: WACS conducted by JICA at Karadiyana DS
187

95% of the surveyed households are Sinhalese, and 5 % are Muslims. Data on the average
number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the table below.
High 51 4.1 219. 314
Middle 67 4.4 45, 224
Low 33 4.6 26, 167
Business 39 2.4 893, 590

Yes 149 99
No 2 1
Total 151 100
Figure 4-58: Availability of garbage collection service in the Kesubewa UC
In the Kesbewa UC, 100 % of surveyed households are provided with a garbage collection
service, and all of them use this service. Moreover, 64 % of surveyed households are “very
satisfied” with the present SWM services
provision, while 28 % are “somewhat
satisfied”.
No. of
Item %
sample
Other 8 5
Irrelevant 9 6
Total 150 100
Figure 4-59: Method of garbage discharge by residence in KUC area
188
common methods are carrying garbage to the collection truck (57%) and discharging it
outside their premises for house to house collection (19 %).
 Only 33 % of surveyed households receive a daily garbage collection service and 26 %
stated received the service 2-3 times/week while 36 % revived the service once in a week.
However, 23 % discharge waste as soon as it generates, while 59% discharge their garbage
daily and 18 % discharge 2-3 times per week.
 In general, adult male is responsible for waste discharge in 54 % surveyed households with
31 % adult female share from the rest.
 As shown in lower Figure, only 8 % of households separate their garbage into organic and
inorganic waste at the source of generation. Furthermore, 38 % of surveyed households are
not/less willing to cooperate with source separation for recycling. Rests of the household
are either very much willing (26 %) or somewhat willing (28 %) to cooperate in the source
separated garbage collection system.
 Further, 82 % of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or someone
system is well established in the Kesbewa UC area.
collection system
Doing
already Very much
8% willing
26%
Not willing
33% Item No. of sample %
Less willing 8 5
Somewhat Not willing 50 33
Less willing willing
5% 28% Doing already 12 8
Total 150 100

collection system in the Kesbewa UC
 None of the surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting.

 62 % households stated that SWM awareness programs are very necessary while 38 %
stated “somewhat necessary”. None of surveyed households stated that awareness
 Only 15 % of household do not like to pay for an improved SWM services. The average
WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is 38 ± 52 LKR/month per
household.
 Out of all surveyed households, 38 % stated that they sell/give away glass & bottles for
recycling and 68 % of residences sell/give-away plastics for recycling. Also, 11 % of
household sale/ give-off Tin/can for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling were as high
as 84 % and 35 % respectively.
189
4.8.5 Waste Flow

survey, statistical data collection, and the census results. The Waste Management Authority
(WMA) encourages separate collection of organic waste and other waste to LAs that are using
the Karadiyana disposal site, where organic waste is composted to reduce the overall volume of
disposed waste. The Moratuwa MC has implemented separate collection since January 2015 and
the other Local Authorities are following this trend. For this reason, it is assumed that waste
flow is based on separation collection, the same as the Moratuwa MC.
compost is 7.1%, material recovery is 3.2%, and the total rate is 9.5%. On the other hand, the
self-disposal amount is 25.7ton/day, which is 28.0% of the total generation amount.
Figure 4-61: Waste Flow of Kesbewa UC (2015)

The generation amount of general waste from businesses such as shops is 5 ton/day.

discharged at the Karadiyana DS. The UC is not involved in the handling of the hazardous waste
of industrial waste.
190
a.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) of industrial waste transported by a certified business entity itself or a
private waste collection company entrusted by business entities is 2,389LKR/Mt while that of
industrial sludge is 5,972LKR/Mt37.

In the Kesbewa UC, there is one large base hospital and 17 small clinics and the total generation
amount of general waste from these facilities is 0.9 tons/day.

General waste generated from the large base hospital is collected by the UC and transported to
the Karadiyana DS. However, medical waste is disposed by the hospital itself and the UC is not
involved. All kinds of waste generated by the small clinics are collected along with the regular
collection service.
b.3 Tipping Fee

In large hospitals, medical waste, such as used syringes, is treated in the incineration facility
within the hospital.

The accurate amount of night soil is not recorded by the UC.

Night soil is collected by the Kesbewa UC and transported to the Water Board Pumping Plant
located in the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, then discharged to the ocean.
c.3 Tipping Fee

Tipping fee for households is 2,200LKR/load and for businesses it is 5,700LKR/load.

The Kesbewa UC is located in the suburbs of the Colombo metropolitan area (in recent years it
has become a commuter town as the residential area has developed). However, the waste
collection rate is as low as 68.5%, the self-disposal rate is 28.0%, and the illegal dumping rate is
3.4%. Improvement of the living environment is urgent and firstly there is a need to improve the
collection rate.
37
According to the interview with the Director of Karadiyana DS dated Oct. 26, 2015.
191
The Kesbewa UC currently uses one leased dump truck and 12 tractors for collections but the
collection efficiency is low. For improvement of the collection service rate, modernization of
collection equipment and optimization of collection methods are required.
a.2 Improvement of Recycling Rate

The recycling rate, which combined the composting rate of organic waste and the recovery rate
of valuables for generation amount, is 10.3% in total. The Karadiyana disposal site—which is a
cluster system—is located in an area in the region of the Kesbewa UC, and therefore the
transportation distance is short, which is advantageous from the viewpoint of waste
management. However, it is important for the UC to prolong the life span of the disposal site by
reducing the disposal amount because its remaining capacity is limited. It is essential to promote
waste reduction through the 3R activities.
The Kesbewa UC is eager to implement separate collection of organic waste recommended by
the WMA as early as possible, but it is necessary to secure the know-how and equipment for
that.
b.1 Strengthening the Financial System for Waste Management

The Kesbewa UC even has difficulty in providing the daily collection service due to the
breakdown of old equipment. It is essential to establish a mechanism to secure the financial
resources required for waste management.
b.2 Securing the Financial Resources for Equipment and Materials

Although there is a need for new procurement and updates of the collection equipment as
described above, the UC is short of day-to-day administrative expenses. Therefore, it is
necessary to secure investment costs for the time being.
192
4.9 Katunayake Seeduwa Urban Council in Western Province

Katunayake Seeduwa is a town in the Gampaha District in the Western Province of Sri Lanka. It
is a town in the suburb of Negombo city, the largest city in the Gampaha District and situated
south of Negombo. It is the site of the Bandaranaike International Airport (also known as
Colombo Airport), the primary international air gateway to Sri Lanka. With the introduction of
the open economy policy in 1977 a large area was allocated to create a free trade zone (currently
known as the Export Promotion Zone). The total area is 10.3 km2.
SriLankan Airlines is the flag carrier of Sri Lanka and is headquartered on the grounds of the
airport in Katunayake. It is served by Sri Lanka Railways' Puttalam Line, with stations at
Katunayake, Katunayake South, and the airport.
Katunayake is at the northern end of the Colombo-Katunayake Expressway which connects the
city of Colombo and the airport. This Expressway is also connected to the A1 highway at
Peliyagoda. Katunayake is currently served by the A3 highway from Colombo to Negombo.
Photo：Katunayake Seeduwa Urban Council
The main industries of Katunayake Seeduwa are the garment industry, hotel services, and the
food and beverage processing industry, etc38. The main religious group of Katunayake Seeduwa
is Catholic (Christian).
Colombo's climate is fairly temperate all throughout the year. From March to April the
average maximum temperature is around 31 degrees Celsius. The only major change in
Colombo’s weather occurs during the monsoon seasons from May to August and October to
January. This is the time of year where heavy rains can be expected. Colombo sees a relatively
small diurnal temperature range, although this is more marked in the drier winter months, where
minimum temperatures average 22 degrees Celsius. Rainfall in the city averages around 2,400
millimetres a year39.
The Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Urban Council) has 16 GN (Grama Niladhari –Village Officer)
divisions. The population trend from 2010-2015 of Katunayake Seeduwa UC is as follows.
Table 4-138: Population Trend of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Population NA 48,271 61,22840 NA 63,243 NA
Source: Divisional Secretariat, Katunayake Seeduwa
38
Based on the interview with CPHI of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (October 29, 2015)
39
World Meteorological Organization http://worldweather.wmo.int/en/city.html?cityId=227 (Viewed on November 15, 2015)
40
http://www.citypopulation.de/SriLanka-Cities.html?cityid=1585
193

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC implements solid waste management and sewage treatment
activities based on section 118-120 of the Urban Council Ordinance No. 61 (1939), the Public
Nuisance Ordinance (1863), and the Waste Management Statute No 01 of 2007 of the Western
Province Council.

The UC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM.
a.3 Organization
In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, the Health Section is in charge of solid waste management.
The head of the Health Section is the Chief Public Health Inspector (CPHI), which is assisted by
the PHI and the Supervisor. They supervise road sweeping and waste collection service in each
zone. The role of the Health Section is as follows:
 Public health activities (dengue fever prevention)
 Road sweeping
 Public awareness on waste separation
 Disposal of animal body
In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, there are no Engineers, Technical Officers (TO) nor Medical
Officers of Health (MOH). The following figure shows the organizational structure and the staff
of the Katunayake Seeduwa UC.
194
Figure 4-62: Organizational chart of Katunayake Seeduwa UC

Table 4-139: Staff related to SWM in Katunayake Seeduwa UC
Engineer 0
Acting 3
Temporary 13 (11+2 substitute)
Driver Permanent 6
Temporary 5 (1 substitute + 4 acting)
Total 88

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to
SWM.
With regard to organization, the experienced CPHI has taken actual command of waste
management and is working in close collaboration with the PHI and the SV. However, the
amount of collection workers are scant.
b. Technical System

In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, mixed collection is being conducted and residents are
195
instructed to put mixed waste in plastic bag(s) and place it on the roadside in the morning of the
designated collection day.
However, the UC is planning to implement separate collection from the end of November, 2015
and to distribute three different kinds of polisacks to enable 200 households to store glass, paper,
and plastic individually. The WMA is also planning to distribute buckets for separated organic
waste.

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC directly collects and transports waste from the households. Under
the supervision of the PHI and the SV, 11 collection drivers and 67 collection workers
(including temporary workers) collect waste.

In areas where wise is collected separately, waste is separated into organic and other waste. In
other areas, waste is mixed. The collection area is divided into five zones and a night collection
area as follows.
The Katunayake Seeduwa UC is roughly divided into 11 zones. However, since there are only
nine collection tractors and one tractor is responsible for one road, it is divided into nine main
roads in total. On the main roads, the house-to-house collection is being conducted in one area,
the kerbside collection in the other area. In the sub roads, there are three collection points that
were created by residents naturally, and the primary collection is conducted by hand carts.
Waste collected by the primary collection is transported to the temporary collection point and
collected by tractors.
In the airport area, nocturnal collection is conducted.
196
Figure 4-63: Collection area in Katunayake Seeduwa UC (as of Nov. 2015)

Collection coverage of the UC is 100% by area basis. The following table shows the collection
method and frequency of waste collection.
197
Table 4-140: Waste collection methods and frequency of Katunayake Seeduwa UC

Mixed waste House-to-house Everyday
Residential area collection or kerbside
collection
Mixed waste House-to-house Once every other day
Nonresidential area collection or kerbside
collection
Village Mixed waste House-to-house Once/week
collection
Note that after the introduction of separate collection, organic waste will be collected six days per week (Monday to Saturday), and
other waste will be collected once a week (Sunday).

Waste collected by the Katunayake Seeduwa UC is transported to the Pilapitiya Kumbura DS.
As there is no truck scale in the DS, the accurate collection amount is not recorded. However, if
it is estimated from the number of truck loads (1load ≒ 1.5ton), which is 20-23 loads/day, the
collected amount is about 30-35ton/day. This amount also includes 1 load/day from the Prima
Chicken Farm, 1 load/week from the Logistic Company, 2 loads/day from the Sri Lankan
Catering Company and 1 load/day from the Sri Lanka Air Line.

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC does not collect any waste collection fees from households. On
the other hand, they collect fees from some of the large waste generators depending on the type
of waste. They do not collect fees from business entities in the Export Promotion Zone.
Table4-141: Collection fee of Katunayake Seeduwa UC
Target Type of waste Collection fee Remarks
Household General waste Free
Logistics Co., Ltd. General waste 1,710 LKR/Load
General waste Directly brought to the
Sri Lankan Catering Co., Ltd. 2,500 LKR/Day
DS
General waste Directly brought to the
Prima Chicken Farm 1,140 LKR/Load
DS
Large generator Green waste 1,500 LKR/Load
Reused for filling of the
Construction
Large generator Free lands(Collection amount
waste
is 5-10Load /month)

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC has nine tractors which are in charge of nine different routes for
waste collection. The following table shows the number of collection vehicles belonging to the
UC.
198
Table4-142: Collection vehicles of Katunayake Seeduwa UC

Number not in operation
Type of vehicles Number
(average)
Tractor with trailer 9 1
2-wheel Tractor with trailer 2
Hand cart 10
Three wheeler 2
The UC keeps the driving record of each vehicle including mileage and collection areas covered.

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC has a workshop but no engineer. Therefore some simple repair
work can be done by the repair and solder specialist there but for other repair work an
engineer(s) from other municipalities (Ja Ela) come to recommend which workshop the UC
should outsource the repairs to.
The vehicle approval process for repairs and purchase of components is as follows: for one
repair, or if the purchase is 10,000 rupees or less, it is necessary to get the recommendation of
the Superintendent of Works (SW) and the approval of the chairman; repair(s) or purchase(s) of
25,000 rupees or less, the SW recommendation and the approval of the council is necessary;.
repair(s) or purchase(s) exceeding 25,000 rupees requires a recommendation from the
mechanical engineer and the Council's approval.
Regarding the approval process of purchasing spare parts and repair work, if the purchase or
repair work costs less than 10,000 LKR, the recommendation of the Superintendent of Works
(SW) and the approval of the chairman is needed. For purchase(s) or repair(s) less than 25,000
LKR, the recommendation of the Superintendent of Works (SW) and the approval of the
Council are needed. And for purchase(s) or repair(s) exceeding 25,000 LKR, the
recommendation of a mechanical engineer and the approval of the Council are necessary.
Excluding simple repair works, all these approval processes are required, which takes time.
Therefore, it is most likely to interfere with waste collection service(s).
Photo：Workshop in the back of the Katunayake Seeduwa Urban Council

In the Katunayake Seeduwa, there is one recycling center where recyclables are sorted and
stored. Although the center was established in 2009, it is not working at present. However, it
will be resumed after the introduction of separate collection at the end of November, 2015.
199
Table 4-143: Intermediate treatment facilities in Katunayake Seeduwa UC

Year of
Execution Capacity
Type Address establishm Remarks
body (ton/day)
ent
Kasagaha
Failed in 2013 due to political
Recycling watta in
UC 0.5 2009 issues but will be resumed after
Center Liyanagem
introduction of separate collection
ulla
b.4 Final Disposal

The Pilapitiya Kumbura disposal site in the Katunayake Seeduwa UC is in Ambalammula
village which is located 2.7km southwest from the UC. Waste has been dumped into this
wetland, which is sandwiched between the highway and the southern end of the Negombo
lagoon, since 1900. The total area is 10 acres (about 4ha).
One council official resides in the disposal site to check the transported waste. According to the
data, collection tractors of the UC make roughly 20 trips (about 30 tons) per day.
The UC had been levelling and compacting the landfill using the leased bulldozer until March
2015 to secure the passage for when collection vehicles have difficulty entering. However, the
UC decided to outsource the landfill operation because the operation is too complicated. They
selected a construction company through bidding and left the operation to them from April 2015.
The landfill equipment placed at the disposal site consists of only one D4-class bulldozer and is
used for daily levelling.
Although each vehicle loading is recorded as described above, the boundary of the disposal site
itself is not clear and waste is dumped wherever there is available space, which is referred to as
an open dump.
Negombo
Lagoon
Pilapitiya DS
Colombo
200
Near the landfill entrance Tractor of UC transporting waste to the DS

At the disposal site, the cement company called HOLCIM once planned to make organic waste
into compost and inorganic waste into RDF, and then reuse them in the cement factory in
Puttalam in the North Western Province. However the preparatory geological survey found that
the cost to do the foundation work of the facility would be substantial because the disposal site
was located on a peat layer. Therefore the plan was aborted. The fences in the above photo are
those that the company set-up in order to identify the planned construction site.
b.5 Issues of the Technical System

Regarding collection and transportation, collection vehicles and engineers who do maintenance
works are insufficient; therefore the UC outsources the repair works of collection vehicles. In
addition, it takes time to go through the approval process for repairs within the UC, which
affects the collection service once collection vehicle(s) have some problems. It also results in
many cases of illegal dumping.
As for the intermediate treatment, although the UC has a plan to introduce separate collection of
organic waste, scenarios for the compost facilities or the material recovery facilities of inorganic
waste after collecting waste have not been considered. The absence of a long-term plan to
establish an appropriate waste management system including the improvement of the collection
rate is a problem.
The final disposal site is an open dump where waste has been dumped and spread in the
mangrove haphazardly, which causes a bad odor and scattering of waste. It is also considered to
be one of the causes of water pollution of the lagoon and there is a high possibility of mass
creation of pests and fires. There is a need for urgent measures for such cases.
201
In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, source separation has not been realized due to mixed collection
being conducted. We did not find any community recycling systems or recycling activities
initiated by NGOs.

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC has distributed home compost bins with a subsidy (cost after
subsidy is 1,000LKR/pc) for 250 households since 2000. The UC will provide another 40
compost bins in the future.

There are 4-5 middleman shops that buy and sell valuable materials in the Katunayake Seeduwa
UC. Main valuable materials are cardboard, PET, metal, hard plastic, and glass. The collection
workers extract these valuable materials from mixed waste during the waste collection and sell
them on the way to the disposal site.

In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, separate collection will be introduced in the future. Firstly, it is
important to encourage source separation, then to establish a system (effective and hygienic
storage and discharge method, setting the separate collection date and time, providing reliable
collection services, etc.) that can be easily understood and adopted by residents.
d. Public Awareness

In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, public awareness activities to promote source separation are
being prepared as they plan to introduce separate collection from the end of November 2015.
The following table shows the outline.
Table 4-144: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Katunayake Seeduwa UC
UC
Execution body
(supported by the WMA & NNSWMSC)
Title Promotion for source separation
Budget source UC, WMA
Budget amount 50,000LKR （2015）
Announcement through house-to-house visit
Community meeting
Methods
Multimedia presentation
Distribution of leaflet of waste separation

The level of participation in source separation has not been evaluated as the separate collection
has not been implemented yet. There are no complaints from residents on waste discharging
manners.

The UC has already prepared public awareness activities for source separation but first of all, it
is essential to set the discharging rules (target waste for separation, collection date, discharge
point, and discharge method) in order for residents to easily understand. It is also necessary to
implement environmental education in schools as well as households.
202
e. Finance

The financial data of the Katunayake Seeduwa Urban Council (Katunayake Seeduwa UC) for
the past three years are presented in the table below. According to the table, the financial results
of the urban council were negative (deficit) in 2012 and positive in the latter two years. The
amount of the differences between the revenues and the expenditures accounted for 14% of the
annual revenues on average.
Table 4-145: Annual Revenue and Expenditure of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit:
Thousand LKR)
Annual Averages
No Category 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 153,646 153,238 175,428 160,771
2 Actual
Revenue 123,323 160,950 191,526 158,599 100.0%
Grant 38,438 43,389 42,541 41,456 26.1%
Expenditure 134,651 131,739 140,402 135,597 85.5%
Recurrent 88,246 101,371 138,280 109,299 68.9%
Capital 46,405 30,368 2,122 26,299 16.6%
Profit or loss -11,328 29,211 51,124 23,002 14.5%
Source: Katunayake Seeduwa UC, “Programme Budget: 2013-2015”
The share of own-source revenues in the total revenues is 74% on average while that of the
grants is only 26%. Based on this, it is considered that the financial condition of the urban
council is relatively stable since the amount of own source revenues is sufficient for financing
the recurrent expenditures of the urban council.
Table 4-146: Breakdowns of the Municipal Annual Revenue of Katunayake Seeduwa
UC (Unit: thousand LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Rates & Taxes 55,991 63,922 94,771 71,561 45.1%
Rents 6,722 14,375 9,941 10,346 6.5%
License 2,112 2,394 3,251 2,586 1.6%
Warrant Costs And Fines 423 624 389 478 0.3%
Other Income 15,863 28,942 33,691 26,165 16.5%
2 Grants:
Recurrent Grant: 23,767 43,389 40,205 35,787 22.6%
Salaries 23,105 42,874 39,338 35,105 22.1%
Council Members Allowances 412 515 867 598 0.4%
Capital Grants 14,670 0 2,337 5,669 3.6%
Total Grants 38,438 43,389 42,541 41,456 26.1%
Total 123,323 160,950 191,526 158,599 100.0%
Considering the grants, the share of capital grants is small, accounting for only 3.6% of the total
municipal revenues; and therefore, the majority of the grants are constituted from the block
grants received from the central government for salaries and allowances of the council staff. On
the other hand, the total of the capital expenditures occupies around 20% of the total
expenditures of the urban council.
Based on this, it was considered that the majority of the capital expenditures were financed from
the own-source revenues of the urban council or external funds such as bank loans and funds
203
released by the Local Loan and Development Fund.

Table 4-147Breakdown of the Annual Expenditure of Katunayake Seeduwa UC (Unit:
Thousand LKR)
Annual Average
No. Types of Expenditure 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Recurrent Expenditure:
Personnel Emoluments 48,116 53,196 70,304 57,206 42.2%
Travelling 158 82 100 113 0.1%
12,121 15,581 22,998 16,900 12.5%
Assets
14,584 16,754 19,246 16,861 12.4%
and Other services
Interest 2,081 459 0 846 0.6%
Grants, Subsidies and Contributions 560 427 689 559 0.4%
371 299 2,426 1,032 0.8%
gratuities
Other expenditures 0.0%
Based on the above findings, it was considered that the Katunayake Seeduwa is a local authority
with an average financial capability. According to the information provided by the urban council,
the annual totals of revenues and expenditures are at the same levels. Although the urban
council does not face difficulties in financing expenses of daily public services, the capability of
the council is not sufficient for improving the quality of services since it requires additional
investments.
e.2 SWM Finance

The table below shows the SWM expenditures of the Katunayake Seeduwa UC in the past three
years. The annual SWM expenditures account for 20 to 30% of the total expenditures of the
urban council.
Table 4-148: The Annual Budget and Actual Expenditure on SWM at Katunayake
Seeduwa UC (Unit: Thousand LKR)
No. Types of Expense 2012 2013 2014
B Actual SWM Revenue (Collected Waste Fees) 1,211 1,067 1,692
C Actual SWM Expenditure:
1 Personnel Emoluments 18,539 20,869 20,490
Uniforms for Workers 1
Boots for Workers
Awareness Program
3 Repairs And Maintenance of Vehicles 3,287 5,547 6,710
4 Final Disposal Payment 0 0 0
5 Other Expenses 826 851 204

204
As the table shows, the amount of the total collected waste fees is not sufficient to finance even
5% of the total SWM expenses. Therefore, the urban council spends funds from other sources of
revenue for financing the SWM expenses.
According to sources at the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, there are three companies that pay waste
collection fees and tipping fees. Among the three, two companies (Sri Lankan Airport Catering
Co., Ltd and Prima Co., Ltd) transport their waste directly to the disposal site managed by the
urban council. Therefore, they pay only the tipping fee. Logistics Co., Ltd, the remaining
company, receives collection services that the urban council provides. Therefore, the company
pays the waste collection fee. All other generation sources such as households and businesses
receive collection services for free of charge.
The waste collection fee and the tipping fee paid by the above three companies are presented in
the table below.
Table 4-149: List of Waste Fees (Tax Included)
No Types of Waste Type of Fee Unit Tariff
1 Logistics Co., Ltd. Waste fee LKR/Load 1710.00
2 Sri Lankan Airport Catering Co., Ltd. Tipping fee LKR/Day 2500.00
3 Prima chicken farm Tipping fee LKR/Load 1140.00
Source: Katunayake Seeduwa UC (results of interview surveys)

The problem found in the SWM financial system of the Katunayake Seeduwa UC is the
implementation of waste collection service for free of charge.

The waste generation amount was calculated and revised with 2015 estimations based on the
waste generation rate of Kandy City obtained by SATREPS in November 2012 and waste
generation units obtained by a locally outsourced survey. The results revealed that the municipal
waste generation amount is 57.6 ton/day and waste generation rate is 929g/person/day.
205
Table 4-150: Waste Generation Amount of Katunayake Seeduwa UC

sources (ton/day)
Restaurants (large) 200.00 Kg/(hotel) 14 2.8
Commercial Organic-shops (large) 350.00 Kg/(restaurant) 3 1.1
Institutions
Market 1,500.00 Kg/(public market) 7 10.5
Total 57.6
Waste composition applies the results of the waste composition survey conducted by the Waste
Management Authority of the local authorities in the Western Province in 2013 and it is revised
for 2015. As a feature, the proportion of sawdust and paddy husk from the sawmill is as high as
22.6%. The organic waste including kitchen waste is 75%. The recyclable waste is 19.7%.
Table 4-151: Waste Composition of Katunayake Seeduwa UC
Category Rate
Kitchen waste 52.4%
Paper 8.8%
Textiles 4.3%
Sawdust/paddy husk 22.6%
Polythene/Plastic & Plummer 4.1%
Metal 0.6%
Street sweeping waste 4.3%
Other 0.9%
100.0%

99% of the surveyed households are Sinhalese, and 1% is Muslims. Data on the average number
of people per household and monthly income is set out in the table below.
206
High 46 5.5 184, 348
Middle 59 4.0 75, 237
Low 46 4.5 33, 957
Business 42 2.3 927, 619
Items No. of sample %

Yes 149 99
No 2 1
Total 151 100
Figure 4-64: Availability of garbage collection service in the Katunayake-Seeduwa MC

In the Katunayake-Seeduwa UC, 99% of surveyed households are provided with a garbage
collection service, of which 93% stated they use this service. Only 48% of surveyed households
are “very satisfied” with the present SWM services provision, while 33% are “somewhat
satisfied”. About 19% of surveyed households are either “not satisfied at all” or “less than
satisfied”.
No. of
Items %
sample
Other 2 1
Irrelevant 5 3
Total 151 100
Figure 4-65: Method of garbage discharge by residence in KSUC area

(56%) and carrying garbage to the collection truck (32%).
 Only 26% of surveyed households receive a daily garbage collection service, 30% stated
207
that they received the service 2-3 times/week and 20% receive the service once in a week.
Similarly, 48% discharge their garbage daily, 12% discharge their garbage 2-3 times per
week, and 23% as soon as it is generated.
 As shown in lower Figure, only 8% of households separate their garbage into organic and
inorganic waste at the source of generation. Only 7% of surveyed households are not/less
willing to cooperate with source separation for recycling. Rests of the household are very
much willing (74%) and somewhat willing (11%) to cooperate in the source separated
 Further, 70% of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or someone
system is well established in the Katunayake-Seeduwa UC area.
collection system
Not willing Doing
6% already Items No. of sample %
Less willing 8% Very much willing 111 74
Less willing 2 1
Somewhat Not willing 9 6
willing Doing already 12 8
11%
Total 151 100
Very much
willing
74%

collection system in the Katunayake-Seeduwa MC
 Only22% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also used
the finished compost for their own garden.
 Not many surveyed households (79%) have ever discussed proper garbage discharge
 66% of household do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue tax
they paid for KSUC. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services is
 Out of all surveyed households, 42% stated that they sell/give away glass & bottles for
household sell/ give-away cans & metals for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
4.9.5 Waste Flow

The Current waste flow has been prepared by analyzing the locally outsourced public opinion
208
survey, statistical data collection, and the census results.
Figure 4-67: Waste Flow of Katunayake Seeduwa UC

amount)/generation amount) is 74.5%, self-disposal such as burning and burying on site is 5.0%,
and illegal dumping is 19.2%. The total recycling rate including compost and recycling
activities is as low as 4.1%.

The generation amount of general waste from businesses such as shops is collected together
with general municipal waste, therefore the generation and disposal amount of industrial waste
are not recorded. As waste generated from the Export Promotion Zone is controlled by the
Board of Investment (BOI), the UC is not involved.

discharged at the Pilapitiya Kumbura DS. The UC is not involved in the handling of the
hazardous waste of industrial waste.
a.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) of industrial waste collected with general municipal waste is free of
charge.
209

In the Katunayake Seeduwa UC, there is only one small hospital and the generation amount of
general waste from this hospital is not recorded as it is collected with general municipal waste.

General waste generated from this hospital is collected by the UC and transported to the
Pilapitiya Kumbura DS. However, medical waste is disposed by the hospital itself and the UC is
not involved.
b.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee (gate fee) of medical waste collected with general municipal waste is free of
charge.

The accurate amount of night soil is not recorded by the UC.

Night soil is collected by the Katunayake Seeduwa UC and transported to the National Water
Supply and Drainage Board Treatment Plant located at Ekala. The tipping fee being charged at
the plant is 856LKR/load.
c.3 Tipping Fee

The tipping fee for households within the city limit is 1700LKR/load, for government
institutions it is 750LKR/load, and for commercial entities it is 4,500LKR/load (excluding VAT).
On the other hand, outside the city limit, for households it is 2,500LKR/load + transport
(60LKR/km), and for commercial entities it is 6,000LKR/load + transport (60LKR/km)
(excluding VAT).

According to the waste flow, the collection service rate of the Katunayake Seeduwa UC is
74.5% but 19.2% out of total waste generation amount is illegal dumping. Therefore, further
improvement of the collection rate is desired.
a.2 Improvement of Final Disposal Site

In the Pilapitiya Kumbura disposal site, waste has been dumped in the wetland for many years.
It is said that the total area is 10 acres (about 4ha) but the boundary of the disposal site itself is
not clear and landfilling is randomly conducted wherever it’s accessible. The disposal site is
located in the sea side across the highway, but it is assumed that waste will be scattered and
spontaneous combustion will occur if the current situation continues as it is. As a result, there
will be a traffic problem connecting the airport and Colombo city. There is an urgent need for
improvement of the final disposal site.
210
b.1 Optimization of Collection Service Fee

The Katunayake Seeduwa UC has sources of large-scale waste generation such as the
Katunayake International Airport and the Export Promotion Zone. Waste generated from these
sources is collected and transported by the UC under a contract basis, however, the UC is forced
to provide the collection service at an unreasonably low fee. Proper waste disposal requires the
necessary costs to be covered, therefore an appropriate waste collection and disposal fee for
large waste generators needs to be introduced.
b.2 Optimization of Disposal Site Management

The landfill management of the final disposal site has been outsourced to a local construction
company since 2015. However, the specifications of the landfilling operation and its
management system are not sufficient because of the limited budget. Therefore, it is desirable to
optimize specification, price, and management system in relation to landfill operation.
211
4.10 Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia Municipal Council in Western Province

Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia is the city of the Colombo District in Western Province, Sri Lanka. It is
situated immediately south of Sri Lanka’s largest city Colombo and has strong ties with the
capital city as a suburb of Colombo. It includes the most urbanized center of Dehiwala and the
beach resort of Mount Lavinia. The total area is 20.19Km2.
The Dehiwala district is located on the border to Colombo. Due to its rapid industrialization and
urbanization in recent years, the cheaper land has resulted in a real estate boom with
hyper-markets, department stores and apartment complexes dotting its skyline. It is also home to
Sri Lanka's National Zoological Gardens which remains one of Asia's largest. Dehiwala has
become an attractive location for holiday accommodation facilities for both business travelers
and holiday makers as a result of its close proximity to Colombo and Mount Lavinia beach. The
town has also suffered extensive pollution as a result of uncontrolled growth and heavy
congestion.
Mount Lavinia district, located in the southern part of the city, is mostly residential suburb. It
has beach resorts and restaurants and has been a hot spot for tourism and laid back nightlife.
Colombo's climate is fairly temperate all throughout the year. From March to April the
temperature averages around 31 degrees Celsius maximum.The only major change in the
Colombo weather occurs during the monsoon seasons from May to August and October to
January. This is the time of year where heavy rains can be expected. Colombo sees little relative
diurnal range of temperature, although this is more marked in the drier winter months, where
minimum temperatures average 22 degrees Celsius. Rainfall in the city averages around 2,400
millimetres a year.
The Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC has 29 GN divisions and is constituted by exactly 29 Wards.
Population trend in 2010-2015 of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is as follows.
Table 4-153: Population Trend of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (2010-2015)
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015(Sept.)
Population NA NA 182,996 NA 185,235 NA
Source: Divisional Secretariat, Dehiwala & Divisional Secretariat, Ratmalana

Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC implements solid waste management and sewage treatment activities
based on the section 129-131 of the Municipal Council Ordinance (1947) and the Public
Nuisance Ordinance (1863).
In 2001, "Solid Waste Management Policy of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC" has been formulated,
which stipulates rough guidelines of SWM of MC. However, the update is under consideration
as the content is too old.

MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to the SWM.
212
a.3 Organization
Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC has Solid Waste Management & Environment Protection Standing
Committee which is assisted by Solid Waste Management Department (SWMD). Deputy
Commissioner is supposed to concurrently serve as the head of SWMD but it’s position is
currently vacant as of October 2015. The role of SWMD is as follows:
 Public health activities (Dengue)
 Road sweeping
 Public awareness on waste separation
Furthermore under the SWMD, there is Refuse Collection & Disposal Division where Chief
Public Health Inspector (CPHI), PHI, and Health Supervisor are allocated. They are responsible
for cleaning services and waste collection and transportation of each Ward. Health Education
Officer (the counterpart of JOCV/Environmental Education) carries out public awareness
programs for waste seprataion. Environment Asst. (vacant as of Oct. 2015) implements other
environmental protection programs. While Mechanical Engineers in the Transport &
Engineering Division are in charge of maintenance, repair, and inspection of the collection
vehicle such as tractors and trailers.
In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, Technical Officer (TO) does not exist, but 2 MOHs exist but they
are not actively involved in SWM activities.
The following figure shows the organizational structure and the staffs of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia
MC.
Figure 4-68: Organizational chart of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
213
Figure 4-69: Organizational chart of SWM section in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC

Table4-154: Staff related to SWM in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Engineer 1
1 Counterpart of
Health Education Officer JOCV/Environmental
Education
MOH(Medical officer of health) 2 Not involved in SWM
SV(Supervisor) 35
Collection workers Permanent 443 Including road sweepers
Temporary 0
Driver Permanent 52
Temporary 0
Disposal site workers Permanent －
Other (Compost yard) Permanent －
Total
214

MC has not formulated any master plan or action plan related to SWM. Existing“Solid Waste
Management Policy of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC”had been formulated more than 15 years ago
so it is already outdated. MC should update it and upgrade to the SWM master plan based on
this policy.
b. Technical System

In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, the separate collection systems has been implemented in some
area in the end of October 2015. However, containers for separated organic waste have not been
distributed yet to each households (currently asking WMA for providing containers for waste
separation). Therefore, residents have been instructed to discharge separated organic waste and
other waste in a different plastic bag. Since the door-to-door collection is provided by MC,
residents put waste on the roadside in the morning of the designated collection day.

Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC directly collects and transports waste from the households. Under the
supervision of PHI and SV, 52 collection drivers and 443 collection workers (including road
sweepers) collect waste.

In the separate collection area, waste is separated into organic and other waste. From the end of
October 2015, firstly separate collection system has been implemented in Ward # 16 ~ 29 of
Rathmalana district on pilot basis, and it will be extended to all other MC including Ward # 1 ~
15 of Dehiwala district within two months.
215
Figure 4-70: Separate collection is in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (as of Nov. 2015)
Collection coverage of MC is 100% on area basis. The following table shows collection method
and frequency of waste.
Table4-155: Waste collection methods and frecuency of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Area Type of waste Collection method Frecuency Remarks

Mixed waste House-to-house 3 times/week
Ward # 1－15
collection
Planning to implement
Organic waste House-to-house Twice/week
bell collection system
collection
Ward # 16－29 in the future
Other waste House-to-house Once/week
collection
216

Waste collected by Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is transported to the Karadiyana DS, according to
the truck scale installed in the DS, collection volume is 170 ton/day.

Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC does not collect any waste collection fee from household. On the
other hand, they collect fee by truck load from large waste generators (more than 500kgs/day)
depending on the type of waste. Currently they collect fee from approximately 900 large waste
generators. They do not issue the trade licence if those large waste generators do not pay the
collection fee.
Table4-156: Collection fee of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Target Type of waste Fee(LKR/load) Collection method

Household General waste Free of charge －
Large generator General waste 1,900 Pay cash or cheque to
Large generator Green waste 2,200 MC each month

The MC has sufficient collection vehicles to provide a collection service to the entire MC. Also
hand carts are used for primary collection in order to provide collection service in the
inaccessible areas. The following table shows the number of collection vehicles number.
Table4-157: Collection vehicles of Dehiwala Mt. LaviniaMC
Number not in
Type of vehicles Number Remarks
operation(average)
Compactor truck (6-8m3) 15 3－5
Skip hoist 2 One is kept for emergency
Dump truck (6m3) 8
Tractor with trailer 25
Hand cart 45 Used for primary
collection & road
sweeping
However, most of the collection vehicles are getting old and breakdown can be found
frequently. The following table shows the manufactured year of each collection vehicle.
Table4-158: Manufactured year of collection vehicles in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Type of vehicle Capacity Registration No. Manufactured year
Dump truck ６㎥ LK-2685 2012

Dump truck ６㎥ 226-2046 1998
Dump truck ６㎥ 226-2048 1998
Dump truck carrier ８㎥ 226-2011 1998
Dump truck 226-2061 1998
Compactor ８㎥ 226-2010 1998
Compactor ４㎥ 226-2039 1998
Tractor ５㎥ RC-8865 2012
217
Type of vehicle Capacity Registration No. Manufactured year
Compactor ４㎥ LD-6732 1996

Tractor ５㎥ RD-1607 2012
Tractor ５㎥ RA-9804 2007
Compactor ６㎥ LA-1053 2004
Compactor ８㎥ 226-2008 1998
Tractor ５㎥ RC-8465 2012
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6543 1996
Tractor ５㎥ RC-8872 2012
Compactor ４㎥ LG-3667 1996
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6548 1997
Compactor ４㎥ 226-2035 1998
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6523 1996
Tractor ５㎥ HC-2492 2003
Compactor ８㎥ 226-2014 1998
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6529 1996
Tractor ５㎥ HC-2481 2003
Tractor ５㎥ RA-9803 2007
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6549 1996
Tractor ５㎥ RG-9174 2012
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6550 1996
Compactor ４㎥ 226-2042 1998
Compactor ４㎥ 226-2040 1998
Tractor ５㎥ RA-9798 2008
Tractor ５㎥ RC-0031 2012
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6519 1995
Compactor ６㎥ LK-2683 2012
Compactor ６㎥ 226-2041 1998
Compactor ４㎥ 226-2037 1998
Tractor ４㎥ RA-1769 2005
Tractor ５㎥ 49-6525 1996
Compactor ５㎥ LA-1052 2004
Tractor ６㎥ RA-9807 2007
Tractor ５㎥ RA-9812 2007
Tractor ５㎥ RA-9799 2008
Compactor ８㎥ 226-2012 1998
Dump truck ６㎥ 226-2049 1998
218
Furthermore, the MC keeps the driving record including mileage and collection areas covered
by each vehicle.

Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC has it’s own workshop in their compound where most of the
maintenance and repar works are done. Regarding the approval process of purchase of spare
parts and repair work, if the purchase or repair work costs less than 15,000 LKR, only need the
approval of chief engineer. For more than 15,000 LKR of purchase or repair needs the Council’s
approval. The approval process goes smoothly without any pending case, it is less likely to
interfere with waste collection service.
Photo：Workshop of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC

In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia, there are one small-scale biogas facilities and two recycling facilities
where recyclables are going to be sorted and stored after implementation of separate collection.
Recycling facilities are planned to reuse the existing resource center. At present, valuable
materials are taken out by the collection workers during the collection and sold to the
middleman shop on the way to DS but after implementation of waste separation, other waste
including valuable materials are going to be transported and sorted in the recycling facilities.
Waste to be received in this facility includes not only waste collected by MC but also waste
brought by neighbouring residents.
However, since the capacity of the facility is limited, not all other waste is transported to the
facility. It is planned to target neighbouring areas of the facility such as Ward 15
(Kawduna-east) and Ward 20 (Katukrunda watte) first. Then if it goes successfully, it will be
expanded to Ward 21 (Attidiya-north) and to Ward 25 (Attidiya-south).
Valuable materials sorted by type will be sold to recyclers and income from the sale will be
shared among collecting workers.
219
Table4-159: Intermediate treatment facilities in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC

Year of
Capacity
Type Execution body Address establish Remarks
(ton/day)
ment
Established by
Biogas is supplied for the 4
Biogas HELPO(NGO) & Bodavita 0.5 2010
households.
maintained by MC
Recycling Established by NGO Bodavita — 2003 Facility was established by
Center 1 & maintained by MC the NGO as a resource
Established by NGO Bodavita — 2006 center, but failed. It
Recycling & maintained by MC expected to be utilized as
Center 2 material recovery facility
after implementation of
*Based on the interview with Officer of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Photo：Recycling Center
b.4 Final Disposal

Since the waste of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is transported and disposed in Karadiyana DS,
please refer the section of b.4 Karadiyana DS of 4.7 Moratuwa MC.

Regarding the issue of collection and transportation, any kind of container for separated organic
waste is not distributed to the residents, therefore it is inefficient for collection workers to open
the plastic bag to check whether it is organic waste or other waste each time of the loading. In
order to make it more efficient and hygienic, container for separate collection should be
distributed to the residents.
Since the collection vehicle is too old, new vehicles shall be replaced.
As for the intermediate facility, the two existing Resource Center has been decided to be
operated as a recycling facility after the implementation of separate collection. Several issues
should be considered such as collection management system of other waste, sorting system and
operating system of the facility and data management systems etc. In addition, these recycling
facilities are located in residential areas, therefore sufficient environmental measures against
such offensive odors and flies are also required.
220

In some areas of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC in 2013, buckets for separated organic waste were
distributed by WMA to residents. However, residents used them for cooking or washing at home
as the public awareness activities were not fully implemented.
Any community recycling system or recycling activities initiated by NGO was not found in this
MC.
Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC does not subsidise any home compost bins. Since the MC has large
commercial area and also collection service coverage is high, incentive for home compost bins
is low.
c.3 Recycle of Valuable Materials
It is said that approximately 50-60 middleman shops that buy and sell valuable materials exist in
Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC. According to the interview with one of these shops (registered),
about 60% of valuable materials is collected by collection workers employed by middleman
shop or by informal collection workers, about 10% is collected by collection workers of MC,
about 30% is collected by residents. The summary of the interview is shown below.
Table4-160: Purchase of valuable materials at Middleman Shop
Collection
Type of Buying price Selling price
amount Destination Remarks
valuables (LKR/kg) (LKR/kg)
（ton/month）
Plastic 0.5 20 25 Plastic
PET 0.15 10 15 PET Recycler
Polythene 0.2 20 25 Recycler
Metal 1 2.5 20 25 Melters Other than
Metal2
Metal 2 0.5 15 20 Melters Fish can etc.
Glass 1.5 3 4 Ceylon glass
company
Cardboard 3 10 15 Exporter to India
Paper 1 5 7 Exporter to India Mainly used
book
＊Based on the interview with Mideleman Shop owner
Photo：Middleman shop in the city
221
c.4 Extraction of Valuable Materials by Collecting Worker

In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, valuable materials are taken out by MC collection workers during
the waste collection and the recovered amount has been recorded by the MC. The average
recovery rate from April 2014 to March 2015 is 0.88%. The following table shows collection
amount of valuables by collection workers.
Table4-161: Collection amount of valuables by collection workers（Apr. 2014～Mar.
2015）
Recyclable 2014
items Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Plastic Kg/month 11,856.00 8,808.00 8,238.40 7,852.60 6,515.64 7,396.56
PET Kg/month 17,784.00 13,211.00 12,357.60 11,778.90 12,669.30 13,149.44
Metal Kg/month 8,299.20 6,165.00 5,766.80 5,496.80 3,619.80 4,931.04
Glass Kg/month 11,856.00 8,808.00 8,238.40 7,067.30 7,601.58 9,040.24
Coconut shell Kg/month 592.80 440.00 411.90 392.60 723.96 410.92
Cardboard &
Kg/month 8,892.00 6,606.00 6,178.80 6,674.70 5,067.72 6,163.80
paper
Total Kg/month 59,280.00 44,038.00 41,191.90 39,262.90 36,198.00 41,092.00
Total ton/month 59.28 44.04 41.19 39.26 36.20 41.09
Disposal
ton/month 4,339.52 5,057.87 5,471.02 5,255.46 5,140.59 5,318.76
amount
Collection
ton/month 4,398.80 5,101.91 5,512.21 5,294.72 5,176.79 5,359.85
amount
Recycling rate 1.3% 0.9% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8%
Recyclable 2014 2015

items Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Plastic Kg/month 7,517.00 7,530.84 8,493.00 6,908.40 6,674.10 7,280.25
PET Kg/month 10,351.00 13,388.16 12,101.00 16,119.60 15,572.90 16,987.25
Metal Kg/month 4,656.00 5,020.56 3,665.04 5,526.72 5,339.28 5,824.20
Glass Kg/month 7,255.00 9,204.36 7,273.50 9,211.20 8,898.80 9,707.00
Coconut shell Kg/month 395.00 418.38 385.00 460.56 444.94 485.35
Cardboard &
Kg/month 6,398.00 6,275.70 7,220.00 7,829.52 7,563.98 8,250.95
paper
Total Kg/month 36,572.00 41,838.00 39,137.54 46,056.00 44,494.00 48,535.00
Total ton/month 36.57 41.84 39.14 46.06 44.49 48.54
Disposal
ton/month 4,885.86 5,142.54 5,800.33 4,347.24 3,909.01 4,605.13
amount
Collection
ton/month 4,922.43 5,184.38 5,839.47 4,393.30 3,953.50 4,653.67
amount
Recycling rate 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% 1.0% 1.1% 1.0%
In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, separate collection has been just implemented in some area so firstly
source separation should be thoroughly encouraged. It is necessary to establish the system (effective
and hygienic storage and discharge method, setting the separate collection date and time, providing
the reliable collection services etc.) in order for residents to understand easily.
The MC has recorded recovery amount of valuables by collection workers. Furthermore, it is
222
necessary to keep records in order to quantitatively verify the change after implementation of
d. Public Awareness
In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, separate collection has been implemented in some area (Rathmalana
District) and public awareness activities to promote source separation have been carried out. In order
to expand separate collection throughout the MC in the future, currently Health Education Division
is preparing leaflets that show collection date and collection point by each Ward. Outline of public
awareness activities including the future plans are shown below.
Table4-162: Outline of Public Awareness Activities in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia (including future
plans)
Execution body MC (Supported by WMA and NSWMSC)
Title Source separation activities
Budget source MC (part of Environmental improvement budget)
Budget amount ？
House-to-house visit by SV and PHI
Public announcement
Distribution of leaflet of waste separation
Methods Demonstration of waste separation
Complaints and request received through Face Book
Call for separation cooperation through mobile phone SMS in collaboration
with the mobile company

Cooperation level of residents for source separation is unknown because separate collection has
just started. Many of the complaints that the MC receives from residents are related to poor
waste discharge manners.
In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, Health Education Officer is now planning a variety of educational
activities in accordance with source separation, it is essential to set the discharging rules (target
waste for separation, collection date, discharge point, and discharge method) in order for
residents to understand easily. It is also necessary to implement environmental education in
schools and activities to improve discharge manners at the same time.
e. Finance
The financial data of Dehiwala Mt.Lavinia MC for the past 3 years are presented in the table
below. As the total revenues exceed the expenditures in the last 2 years in row, Dehiwala Mt.
Lavinia MC can be considered to be in good financial condition.
223
Table4-163: Annual Revenues and Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)

Annual Average
No Category 2012 2013 2014
000 LKR %
1 Approved Budget 1,020,881 1,151,707 1,299,906 1,157,498
2 Actual
Revenue 817,359 1,224,447 1,425,264 1,155,690 100.0%
Grant 367,395 408,426 608,611 461,478 39.9%
Expenditure 901,662 964,544 1,221,134 1,029,113 89.0%
Recurrent 847,653 868,969 1,157,655 958,092 82.9%
Capital 54,009 95,575 63,479 71,021 6.1%
Profit or loss -84,303 259,903 204,130 126,577 11.0%
Source：Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC、『Programme Budget：2014～2016』
According to the annual averages, the total of own-source revenues accounts for 60% in the total
municipal revenues and the grants from the central government and the provincial council occupy
40%.
The own-source revenues are categorized into (1) Rates/Taxes constituted mainly by the property
taxes, (2) Rents of facilities and other municipal properties, (3) License fees, (4) Fees for municipal
services, (5) Warrant costs and fines, (6) Other revenues. Among the own-source revenues, the
property taxes (Rates/Taxes) and other revenues are the major types since the share of these revenues
accounts for 25% and 24% in the total municipal revenues respectively.
Although the grants occupies 40% in the total municipal revenues, the most of the amount is the
block grant (36% in the total municipal revenues) released by the central government as salary and
allowances for the municipal staff. The share of the capital grant is small accounting for 3.6% in the
total revenues.
Table4-164: Breakdowns of Annual Revenues of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (Unit: thousand

LKR)
Annual Average
000 LKR %
Rates & Taxes 155,387 381,996 339,880 292,421 25.3%
Rents 16,243 18,342 16,973 17,186 1.5%
License 15,237 26,428 39,027 26,898 2.3%
Other Income 197,184 302,797 323,613 274,531 23.8%
2 Grants: 0.0%
Recurrent Grant: 367,235 408,327 483,287 419,616 36.3%
Salaries 364,297 405,611 479,687 416,532 36.0%
Capital Grants 160 98 125,324 41,861 3.6%
Total Grants 367,395 408,426 608,611 461,478 39.9%
Total 817,359 1,224,447 1,425,264 1,155,690 100.0%
The table below shows the dynamics of the annual expenditures of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC.
According to the table, the shares of recurrent and capital expenditures in the annual average of
the total expenditures are 93% and 7% respectively.
224
Table4-165: Breakdowns of Total Expenditures (Unit: Thousand LKR)

Annual Average
000 LKR %
Travelling 5,086 6,957 6,094 6,046 0.6%
Repairs And Maintenance Of Capital
98,244 108,369 247,495 151,369 14.7%
Assets
140,718 128,450 120,609 129,925 12.6%
And Other Services
Interest 5,361 6,853 7,362 6,525 0.6%
Pensions, Retirements, Benefits And
11,479 9,201 10,263 10,314 1.0%
Gratuities
Other Expenditures 1,969 5,498 8,401 5,289 0.5%
Total Recurrent Expenditures 847,653 868,969 1,157,655 958,092 93.1%
Total Expenditure 901,662 964,544 1,221,134 1,029,113 100.0%
As interview results reveal, the municipal council possesses sufficient own-sources for
financing its recurrent expenses; and thus, the municipality does not face financial difficulties in
conducting its daily activities. Since the own-source revenues are not sufficient for improving
the quality of public services, the municipality has been dependent on external sources such as
bank loans, loans from Local Loan Development Fund (LLDF) and grants from the central
government and the provincial council for implementation of necessary investments.
e.2 SWM Finance
The financial condition of SWM sector in Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia Municipal Council is
Each year, the actual total of SWM expenditures reached to the level of the total expenditures
budgeted for the year and accounts for around 23 to 26% in the total municipal expenditures.
On the other hand, the collection rates of the waste fees are extremely low accounting for less
than 6% in the annual totals of the SWM expenditures. The main reason for these low rates is
the implementation of waste collection service for free of charge for households and
small/middle-scale businesses and collection of fees only from big-scale businesses. According
to the municipality, the big-scale businesses are those generating an amount of waste that equals
to a half of a tractor trailer daily and usually decided based on personal judgements of public
health inspectors. Therefore, the number of businesses that are paying the waste fee are very
few (900 businesses were registered as payers at the end of October, 2015).
225
Table4-166: The Annual Budgets and Actual Expenditures of SWM (Unit: Thousand
LKR)
B Actual SWM Revenues (Collected Waste Fees) 3,208 11,715 14,883
Uniforms For Workers 589 597 123
Boots For Workers 21 26 83
Other Supplies 0 2,435 1,971
Total Supplies And Materials Expenses 30,623 37,350 37,742
3 Repairs And Maintenance Of Vehicles 12,178 11,965 12,874
4 Final Disposal Payment 25,489 29,048 32,523
5 Other Expenses 16,411 5,285 5,739

Source：Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC、『Programme Budget：2014～2016』（Programme-2/Project-5：Solid waste management）
Based on the above circumstances, the municipality has been financing the SWM expenditures from
its other types of own-source revenues.
The major problem identified in the SWM Financial System of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is the
waste collection expenses and revenues from the waste fee are not linked. In other words, the
municipality focuses on the total amounts of expenditures and the own-source revenues only and
does not consider sustainability of public services such as waste collection.
At the same time, big-scale businesses were not clearly defined; and therefore, no official methods
and procedures for identification of big-scale businesses are being used. Therefore, it would be
difficult to increase the waste fee revenues by identifying new big-scale businesses.
Waste generation amount was calculated based on the waste generation rate obtained by SATREPS
in November 2012 and waste generation units obtained by locally outsourced survey. As a result,
municipal waste generation amount is 175.2 ton/day and waste generation rate is 933g/person/day.
226
Table4-167: Waste Generation Amount of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC

sources (ton/day)
Hotels (large) 1,000.00 Kg/(hotel) 11 11.0
Institutions Buddhist temples 5.15 Kg/(temple) 0 0.0
Public park 100.00 Kg/(park) 2 0.2
Kg/(public
Market 3,000.00 8 24.0
market)
Total 175.2
The results of the locally outsourced survey on waste composition conducted from 15 to 21
October in Karadiyana Disposal Site is shown below.
Table4-168: Waste Composition of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
Category Rate
Kitchen waste 52.5%
Paper 13.6%
Textiles 4.3%
Grass & wood 14.1%
Soft Plastics 9.1%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
Metal 0.7%
Other 0.1%
100.0%

87% of the surveyed households are Sinhalese, 7% are Muslims and 6% Tamils. Data on the
227
average number of people per household and monthly income is set out in the Table below.
Table4-169: Average and standard deviation values of income and family size
High 50 4.1 129, 740
Middle 50 4.7 62, 360
Low 50 5.4 28, 560
Business 43 5.0 21, 644, 884
Item No.of sample %

Yes 150 100
No 0 0
Total 150 100
Figure 4-71: Availability of garbage collection service in the DMMC

In the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, 100% of surveyed households are provided with a garbage
collection service, of which 97% stated they use this service. Only 24% of surveyed households
are “very satisfied” with the present SWM service provision, while 51% are “somewhat
satisfied”.
No.of
Item %
sample
Other 3 2
Irrelevant 0 0
Total 150 100
Figure 4-72: Method of garbage discharge by residences in the DMMC area

common methods are carrying garbage to the collection truck (74%) and discharging it
outside their premises for house to house collection (22%).
 Only 9% of surveyed households receive a daily garbage collection service while 47%
stated that they received the service 2-3 times/week. Similarly, 23% discharge their
garbage 2-3 times per week, but 39% as soon as it is generated and 34% discharge their
228
garbage daily.
 In general, adult females handle waste in about 63% of surveyed households and the duty is
covered by servants in 19% of households. In high income households, servant contribution
is as high as 32%.
 As shown in lower Figure, on average 21% of households separate their garbage into
organic and inorganic waste at the source of generation but only 4 % of high-income
households are doing so. About 19% of surveyed households are not/less willing to
cooperate with source separation for recycling. Further, 33% are very much willing and
10% are somewhat willing to cooperate in the source separated garbage collection system.
 Also, 79% of surveyed households stated that there are recyclable collectors or someone
system is well established in the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC area.
collection system
Item No.of sample %
Doing Somewhat willing 40 27
already Very much
21% Less willing 8 5
willing
33% Not willing 21 14
Doing already 32 21
Not willing Total 150 100
14%
Less willing
5% Somewhat
willing
27%

collection system in the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC
 Only 3% of surveyed households use kitchen/garden waste for composting and also use the
 Not many surveyed households (87%) have never discussed proper garbage discharge
 60% of households do not like to pay for SWM services mainly because of the revenue tax
they paid for DMMC. The average WTP (willingness to pay) for improved SWM services
is 75 ± 132 LKR/month per household.
 Out of all surveyed households, 35% stated that they sell/give-away glass & bottles for
households sell/ give-away cans & metals for recycling. Cardboard and paper recycling
4.10.5 Waste Flow

229
statistical data collection, and the results of census. It should be noted that Dehiwala Mt.
Lavinia MC has not started separate collection as of November 2015 but it will be implemented
in some area within this year. For this reason, it is assumed that waste flow is based on
separation collection as same as Moratuwa MC.
According to waste flow, collection rate ((discharge amount + direct loading
amount)/generation amount) is 95.40%. As for recycling rate for generation amount, compost is
1. Waste generation
175.2 t/d
(100.0%)
0% reduction by source separation
2. Organic waste 3. Other waste 6. Direct haulage

0.9 t/d 153.4 t/d 12.8 t/d
(0.5%) (87.6%) (7.3%)
9. On-site compost 15. On-site recycling
0.7 t/d 0.6 t/d
(0.4%) (0.3%)
4. Self disposal 7. Collection-1 11. Collection-2
3.2 t/d 0.3 t/d 152.8 t/d
(1.8%) (0.2%) (87.2%)
16. Recycling (1)
4.1 t/d
(2.3%)
10. Off-site compost 8. Compost plant 12. MRF 17. Off-site recycling
0.2 t/d 0.3 t/d 148.7 t/d 0.0 t/d
(0.1%) (0.2%) (84.9%) (0.0%)
Composting 18. Recycling (2)

0.8 t/d 19. Residue 1.3 t/d
5. Illegal dumping 0.0 t/d (0.7%)
4.9 t/d 13. Landfill
(2.8%) 161.5 t/d
(92.2%)
Material Recovery
20. Remove 6.0 t/d
4.6 t/d 14. Final Disposal
164.8 t/d
(94.1%)
Karadiyana DS
Recycling (1): Recyclables tak en by the collection work ers

Recycling (2): Recyclables tak en by the waste pick ers at landfill site
0.5%, material recovery is 3.4%, and the total rate is lower than 3.9%, which is lower than the
other surrounding municipalities. On the other hand, final disposal rate for generation amount
has reached to 94.1%, which has become a burden on the Karadiyana disposal site
Figure 4-74: Waste Flow of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC (2015)

Since general waste generated by businesses such as shops other than industrial waste is
collected together with general municipal waste, the generation amount and the disposal amount
of industrial waste are not identified.
a.2 Collection, transportation and Disposal

discharged in Karagiyana DS. being carried to Karadiyana disposal site. The UC is not involved
in handling of hazardous waste of industrial waste.
a.3 Tipping Fee
230
Tipping fee of industrial waste transported by certified business entity itself or private waste
collection company entrusted by business entities is 2,389LKR/Mt and that of industrial sludge
is 5,972LKR/Mt41.
In Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC, there are one large hospital and several small clinics and the total
generation amount of general waste from these facilities is 2 ton/day.
General waste generated from the large hospital is collected by MC and transported to
Karadiyana DS. However, medical waste is disposed by hospital itself and the MC is not
involved. All kinds of waste generated by the small clinics are collected along with the regular
collection service.
b.3 Tipping Fee
In the large hospital, medical waste such as used syringes is treated in the incineration facility
within the hospital.
The accurate amount of night soil is not recorded by MC.
Night soil is collected by the Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC and transported to the Water Board
Pumping Plant located in the MC, then discharged to the ocean.
c.3 Tipping Fee
Tipping fee for households is 1,965LKR/load, for government agencies is 4,474LKR/load,
and for business is 5,606LKR/load.
a.1 Promotion of 3R
The level of waste management of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is considered high due to its high
collection rate. However, it is also a fact that the final disposal rate has reached to 94.1%, which
has become a big burden on the Karadiyana disposal site. Therefore it is highly desirable to
make more efforts towards waste reduction.
MC is planning to implement separate collection of organic waste in some area within this year
and to expand gradually. Even in Moratuwa MC where separate collection was introduced about
one year earlier, organic waste is not yet completely separated. Therefor it is also essential to
conduct software activities such as public awareness and improvement of waste discharge
manners. It is desirable to implement project aiming to promote 3R activities
b.1 Formulation of Solid Waste Management Plan
41
According to the interview with the Director of Karadiyana DS dated Oct. 26, 2015.
231
The level of waste management of Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is considered high compared to
the other municipalities. To establish the current management system, MC has made various
improvements based on the plan 10 years ago. However, there is no future plans. There is a need
for the development of solid waste management master plan, since it is essential to formulate
waste policy for the future,
Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC is currently using the Karadiyana disposal site operated by WMA
but the MC should be responsible for waste generated by its own wards. Therefore, it is
desirable for MC to identify its own role for the operation of final disposal site within the master
plan.
232
5 Projection of Waste Generation Amount and Waste Composition

5.1 Population Projection
The population of Sri Lanka was projected for the year 2015 by each District based on the
census data of 2012 and the population data up to 2014 that were obtained from the Department
of Statistics. In addition, the total population was estimated based on the population growth rate
from 2015 to 2024 projected by the United Nations Population Division, Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. Accordingly, the growth rate of the total population up to 2024
was applied to the growth rate of each District from 2012 to 2015 to figure out the future
population of the target local authorities.
Table5-1: Population projections for 2015
District 2012* 2013* 2014* ‘12-‘13 2015(estimated)
Sri Lanka 20,359,439 20,513,923 20,705,287 0.85% 20,880,619
Colombo 2,324,349 2,335,322 2,351,284 0.58% 2,364,868
Gampaha 2,304,833 2,316,801 2,331,761 0.58% 2,345,343
Kalutara 1,221,948 1,228,931 1,237,908 0.65% 1,245,966
Kandy 1,375,382 1,384,352 1,397,308 0.79% 1,408,402
Matale 484,531 488,511 493,485 0.92% 498,024
Nuwara-Eliya 711,644 720,602 729,560 1.25% 738,686
Galle 1,063,334 1,070,316 1,079,294 0.75% 1,087,364
Matara 814,048 821,023 827,997 0.85% 835,062
Hambantota 599,903 607,875 616,844 1.40% 625,493
Jaffna 583,882 587,874 591,867 0.68% 595,900
Kilinochchi 113,510 115,501 117,493 1.74% 119,536
Mannar 99,570 100,566 102,557 1.49% 104,084
Vavuniya 172,115 173,110 176,095 1.15% 178,119
Mullaitivu 92,238 93,241 94,243 1.08% 95,262
Batticaloa 526,567 529,559 533,548 0.66% 537,073
Ampara 649,402 656,374 664,342 1.14% 671,941
Trincomalee 379,541 383,526 389,503 1.30% 394,581
Kurunegala 1,618,465 1,627,434 1,639,393 0.64% 1,649,959
Puttalam 762,396 769,372 777,345 0.98% 784,929
Anuradhapura 860,575 869,539 879,500 1.09% 889,118
Polonnaruwa 406,088 409,081 414,070 0.98% 418,120
Badulla 815,405 823,380 832,351 1.03% 840,956
Monaragala 451,058 457,032 464,002 1.42% 470,613
Ratnapura 1,088,007 1,098,967 1,110,923 1.05% 1,122,561
Kegalle 840,648 845,634 852,615 0.71% 858,662
* Source: Registrar General's Department
Note: Mid-year Population estimates were revised based on the final results of the Census of Population and housing 2012. District
level figures are given on the basis of usual residence.
Table 5-2: Population Projection from 2015 to 2024

Year Estimated population (thousand) Annual growth rate
2015 20,715 1
2016 20,811 0.46%
2017 20,905 0.45%
2018 20,996 0.44%
2019 21,081 0.40%
2020 21,157 0.36%
2021 21,224 0.32%
2022 21,283 0.28%
2023 21,334 0.24%
2024 21,378 0.21%
Source: United Nations Population Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs
The future population of the target local authorities is shown in the following page.
233
Table5-3: Population Projection from 2015 to 2024

District Local Authority 2012 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Colombo Dehiwala-Mt. Lavinia MC 184,468 187,684 188,552 189,409 190,234 191,002 191,693 192,300 192,830 193,290 193,693
Colombo Moratuwa MC 168,280 171,214 172,006 172,787 173,540 174,241 174,871 175,424 175,908 176,328 176,695
Colombo Kesbewa UC 185,122 188,350 189,221 190,080 190,909 191,679 192,372 192,981 193,513 193,976 194,379
Gampaha Katunayake Seeduwa UC 60,915 61,986 62,273 62,556 62,828 63,082 63,310 63,510 63,686 63,838 63,971
Nuwara Eliya Nuwara-Eliya MC 23,804 24,709 24,823 24,936 25,045 25,146 25,237 25,317 25,386 25,447 25,500
Jaffna Jaffna MC 80,829 82,493 82,875 83,251 83,614 83,952 84,255 84,522 84,755 84,957 85,134
Trincomalee Trincomalee UC 48,351 50,268 50,500 50,729 50,951 51,156 51,341 51,504 51,646 51,769 51,877
Kurunegala Kurunegala MC 24,833 25,317 25,434 25,549 25,661 25,764 25,857 25,939 26,011 26,073 26,127
Polonnaruwa Thamankaduwa PS 82,426 84,869 85,261 85,648 86,022 86,369 86,681 86,956 87,195 87,404 87,586
234
Moneragala Katharagama PS 18,220 19,010 19,098 19,185 19,269 19,346 19,416 19,478 19,532 19,578 19,619
5.2 Projection of Waste Generation Amount
5.2.1 Waste Generation Rate

The waste generation rate is estimated for 2015 based on the existing survey results.
Table5-4: Survey Results Applied for the Waste Generation Rate
Target local authorities Survey results applied
1.Uv Kataragama PS SATREPS-Hambantota MC report p80
2.North-CentralThamankaduwa PS SATREPS-Hambantota MC report p80
3.NorthernJaffna MC Akkarapattu MC report p7
4.EasternTrincomalee UC Akkarapattu MC report p7
5.North-WesternKurunegala MC NSWMSC Action Plan
6.CentralNuwara Eliya MC SATREPS-Kandy MC report p56
7.WesternKatunayake Seeduwa UC SATREPS-Kandy MC report p56
8.WesternMoratuwa MC SATREPS-Kandy MC report p56
9.WesternKesbewa UC SATREPS-Kandy MC report p56
10.WesternDehiwela Mt. Lavinia MC SATREPS-Kandy MC report p56
Only the waste generation rate of households was assumed to increase in the future based on the
actual results from 1965 to 1970 in Japan; the waste generation rate was calculated for 2015 by
assuming that the increase in the rate of generation amount corresponds to 55% of the GDP
growth rate (similar to Japan from 1965 to 1970).
It should be noted that the generation rate of Kandy Town shown in the SATREPS could not be
applied to the Kesbewa UC and the Katunayake Seeduwa UC because it was too large. In those
local authorities, the generation rate of commercial entities and offices is assumed to be 30%
and that of hospitals, markets, and industry is assumed to be 50%.
5.2.2 Waste Generation Unit

The waste generation unit was obtained from the registration data and the statistical data given
by the local authorities in the outsourced survey. The numbers obtained were classified into
each generation source that are considered in the generation amount rate.
The future generation unit was calculated on the assumption that commercial and industrial
waste is proportional to the GDP growth rate and that the office and market waste is
proportional to the population growth rate.
5.2.3 Generation Amount

Based on the generation rate and generation unit obtained above, the total waste generation
amount of the target local authorities was calculated.
235
Table5-5: Projection of Waste Generation Amount of Target LAs

Province 2015 2020 2024
1.Uva Katharagama PS 13.7 15.0 16.1
2.North-Central Thamankaduwa PS 88.2 88.7 93.2
3.Northern Jaffna MC 105.8 121.6 138.0
4.Eastern Trincomalee UC 62.1 71.4 80.8
5.North-Western Kurunegala MC 48.1 53.9 59.4
6.Central Nuwara Eliya MC 32.0 33.0 37.4
7.Western Katunayake Seeduwa UC 57.6 62.8 69.0
8.Western Moratuwa MC 124.5 137.9 150.0
9.Western Kesbewa UC 91.8 97.5 102.7
10.Western Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC 175.2 196.2 215.4
5.3 Projection of Waste Composition

The waste composition of target local authorities applies the results of WACS in the survey and
the existing survey results as follows.
Table5-6: Survey Results Applied for the Waste Composition
Target local authorities Survey results applied
1.Uva Kataragama PS WACS by JICA
2.North-Central Thamankaduwa PS WACS by JICA
3.Northern Jaffna MC WACS by JICA
4.Eastern Trincomalee UC NSWMSC KinnyaUC 2010
5.North-Western Kurunegala MC NSWMSC Action Plan
6.Central Nuwara Eliya MC SATREPS-Kandy MC p57
7.Western Katunayake Seeduwa UC Waste Management Authority 2013
8.Western Moratuwa MC WACS by JICA @ Karadiyana DS
9.Western Kesbewa UC WACS by JICA @ Karadiyana DS
10.Western Dehiwela Mt. Lavinia MC WACS by JICA @ Karadiyana DS
5.3.1 Basis for Prediction
a. Method of Projection of Future Waste Composition

For the future waste compositon, the classified waste shown in the table below is set to increase
based on the assumptions below. The proportion of each type of waste is estimated by adjusting
the generation amount obtained in the previous section.
236
Table5-7: Proportion Applied for Future Generation Amount

Type of waste Future generation amount
Kitchen waste Status quo
Paper In proportion to the GDP growth rate
Textiles In proportion to the GDP growth rate
Grass & wood Status quo
Soft Plastics In proportion to the GDP growth rate
Hard Plastics In proportion to the GDP growth rate
Rubber & leather Status quo
Metal In proportion to the GDP growth rate
Glass & bottles Status quo
Stone & ceramic Status quo
Other Status quo
b. Population Growth Rate and GDP Growth Rate Applied

Although the applied rate of economic growth in the future estimates are the same in all target
local authorities, the population growth rate is different in each target local authority.
Table5-8: Population Growth Rate and Economic Growth Rate Adopted in Future
Estimates
Items 2015 2020 2024 Note
1.425% 0.361% 0.208% Katharagama PS
0.978% 0.361% 0.208% Thamankaduwa PS
0.681% 0.361% 0.208% Jaffna MC
1.304% 0.361% 0.208% Trincomalee UC
0.644% 0.361% 0.208% Kurunegala MC
Population growth rate
1.251% 0.361% 0.208% Nuwara-Eliya MC
0.582% 0.361% 0.208% Katunayake Seeduwa UC
0.578% 0.361% 0.208% Moratuwa MC
0.578% 0.361% 0.208% Kesbewa UC
0.578% 0.361% 0.208% Dehiwala-Mt. Lavinia MC
GDP growth rate 5.000% 5.000% 5.000% Common rate for all
*： Population growth rate of Moratuwa MC
Source: United Nations Population Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs
5.3.2 Future Waste Composition

Current status (2015) and predicted future status (2024) of waste composition of the target local
authorities are shown below.
237
Current（2015） Future（2024）
Katharagama PS
Glass & bottles Stone & Glass & bottles
Stone &
1% ceramic Metal 1%
Rubber & ceramic
Rubber & 5% Other leather 0% 5%
leather Metal 0% 0% Other
0% 0%
0%
Hard Plastics
Hard Plastics 1%
1%
Soft Plastics Soft Plastics
4% 6%
Grass & wood Grass & wood
18% 17%
Kitchen waste Textiles Kitchen waste
Textiles 63% 1% 59%
1% Paper
Paper
7%
10%
Thamankaduwa PS
Jaffna MC
Trincomalee UC
238
Kurunegala MC
Nuwara-Eliya MC
Katunayake Seeduwa UC
Moratuwa MC, Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia, Kesbewa

UC
Glass & bottles Stone &
Stone & Metal
Glass & bottles Rubber & 1% ceramic
Metal ceramic 1% Other
1% 2% Other leather 2%
1% 0%
Rubber & 0% 1%
leather
1% Hard Plastics
Hard Plastics
2%
1%
Kitchen waste
Soft Plastics Soft Plastics 45%
9% Kitchen waste 12%
Grass & wood 53%
14%
Grass & wood
Textiles 12%
4%
Paper Textiles
14% 6% Paper
18%
Figure 5-1：Current and Predicted Future Waste Composition of the Target LAs
239
6 Possibility of Support for Solid Waste Management

6.1 Issues and needs
The summary of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities according to the results of the
survey are shown in the table below.
Table 6-1: The summary of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities
Items Issue Need
Discharge/ collection/  Collection vehicles are too old and  Replacement of old vehicles to
transportation malfunction brand new ones
 Lack of human resource, vehicle  Ensure human resource, vehicle
and equipment for SWM and and equipment for SWM and
maintenance maintenance
 Collection service rate is low  Making the collection system more
efficient such as improving the
collection rules
Intermediate  Existing compost plant does not  Improving operation of the existing
treatment function properly compost plant
 Existing and new valuable material  Improving and formulating the

recovery facility does not function operation system for valuable
properly material recovery facility
Disposal  Open dumping of waste has an  Improving existing disposal site
adverse impact on surrounding and establishing a new sanitary
environment disposal site
 Some leachate treatment facilities  Establishing a monitoring system
do not work properly and improving leachate treatment
facility
 Wild elephants, which scavenge the  Finding an effective solution to
discharged waste disturb the proper deal with elephants
operation of disposal site(s)
 Life time of existing disposal site is  Introducing the intermediate
limited treatment facility to extend the life
time of disposal site(s) is need
3Rs  Waste reduction at generation  Promoting an effective 3Rs
source is not carried out programme
 Existing compost plant and
valuable material recovery facility
do not function properly
Financial system  Budget for SWM is insufficient  Introducing the “Polluter Pays
due to lack of revenue source(s) Principle”
 Establishing sufficient subsidies for
SWM from central government
The details of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities are described in the table below.
240
Table 6-2: The detail of issues and needs at ten priority local authorities
Discharge/ collection/ transportation Intermediate treatment Disposal 3Rs
No. Province Local Authority
Issues Needs Issues Needs Issues Needs Issues Needs
Waste collection Increasing the Barrel for the Proper There are three disposal sites Unification of None. Promoti
service rate is as low as collection service collection of organic collection of which become open three disposal on of
65.7% and one fourth of rate to reduce waste taken to the organic waste dumping, waste scattering sites is needed to proper
waste generation self-disposal. compost plant is not system and leachate leaking and this carry out proper 3Rs
1 Uva Kataragama PS amount is self-disposed Centralization of distributed. Improvement of causes a serious operations program
Large annual treatment of waste operation of environmental issues.
fluctuation of waste collected at several exiting compost
generation amount. remote areas. plant.
Waste collection service Increasing the The compost plant Improvement of Disposal site causes serious Improvement of Valuable material is Promoti
does not run on waste collection owned by PS was operation of environmental impacts to the existing disposal not separated on of
schedule service rate through started operation exiting compost surrounding areas properly. proper
procurement of again since 2015. plant is need. Wild elephants scavenge Find an effective 3Rs
North Separated valuable the disposed waste & disturb solution to deal program
2 Thamankaduwa PS Waste collection service collection vehicles.
Central rate is as low as 18%. waste includes much Proper waste the operations of the with elephants
residue and it is separation disposal site.
requires some more system .
sorting by workers.
Although the waste Enhancement of The garden compost Promotion of The disposed waste is Improvement of Although Promoti
241
collection rate is 75.7%, waste collection plant and MRF are proper waste scattered and expanded. existing disposal promotion of 3Rs is on of
the waste collection capacity by not functioning separation of There is no orderly function site carried out, the proper
service does not run on replacement of old properly due to lack organic waste of design of new land fill Construction of activity is 3Rs
3 Northern Jaffna MC schedule due to collection vehicles of technology and Improvement of site. new sanitary insufficient program
malfunction of old to new ones. management. operation of Some surrounding LAs have landfill site.
collection vehicles exiting compost issues with the landfill site. Establishment of
. plant regional landfill
site
Although the waste Enhancement of None None Open dumping causes Improvement of No activity of 3Rs Promoti
collection rate is 62.9%, waste collection environmental issues to the existing disposal is carried out. on of
the waste collection capacity through surrounding area site proper
4 Eastern Trincomalee UC service does not run on replacement of old Wild elephants scavenge the 3Rs
schedule due to collection vehicles disposed waste & disrupt the Find an effective program
malfunction of old to brand new ones operation of the disposal site solution to deal
collection vehicles with elephants
Although the waste Enhancement of The existing compost Improvement of Although the disposed waste Improvement of Organic waste for Promoti
collection rate is 80.4%, waste collection plant is not operations for the is regularly moved by heavy existing disposal the compost plant is on of
the waste collection capacity by functioning properly existing compost machinery, the covering soil site separated at proper
North-We service does not run on replacement from due to lack of plant is not properly carried out generation source in 3Rs
5 stern Kurunegala MC schedule due to old collection technology and and this causes some areas,, but the program
malfunction of old vehicles to new management environmental issues to the amount of separated
collection vehicles. ones surrounding area. organic waste is not
enough
Discharge/ collection/ transportation Intermediate treatment Disposal 3Rs
No. Province Local Authority
Issues Needs Issues Needs Issues Needs Issues Needs
Although the waste collection Solution for worker The material Establishment The leachate Establishment of The material recovery Promotion of
rate is 78.2%, the absence of absence, such as recovery facility of proper treatment proper facility will be proper 3Rs
waste collection workers improvement of will be operations for facility seems monitoring established from program
sometimes causes the delays or contract, instruction of established from new material to be Improvement of 2016.
disruptions of the collection duty proper family finance, 2016. recovery malfunctioning leachate
6 Central Nuwara Eliya MC
There is a lot of waste scattered etc. facility and might treatment facility.
at stationed collection points Stationed collection cause water
points are abandoned pollution
and start kerbside downstream.
collection.
The waste collection rate (74%) Making an efficient Operation costs Improvement The basic Improvement of Although the Introduction
can be considered low because of collection system of the Karadiyana of the infrastructure at the Karadiyana composition of of source
great impacts on residents’ living compost plant are Karadiyana the Karadiyana disposal site organic waste at separation
environment. Enhancement of waste higher than the compost plant disposal site is generation source is programme
The waste collection service collection capacity by tipping fees Establishment insufficient. Introduction of a 66.6%, the collection
7 Western Moratuwa MC
does not run on schedule due to replacement of old The material of proper The capacity of new rate of this is less than Promotion of
malfunction of old collection collection vehicles to recovery facility operations for the disposal intermediated 50%. proper 3Rs
vehicles, with 80% of all new ones. will be material site is limited facility The collection rate program
collection vehicles under repair. established from recovery (expectation of valuable material is
2016 facility is 3years) quite low at 3.1%
242
The waste collection rate Making an efficient Ditto ditto Ditto ditto The recycling rate of Introduction
(68.5%) in residential areas can collection system organic waste and of source
be considered low and valuable material is separation
self-disposal (28%), illegal Enhancement of waste low (10.3%). programme
8 Western Kesbewa UC dumping (3.4%) are high. collection capacity by
The waste collection service replacement of old Promotion of
does not run on schedule due to collection vehicles to proper 3Rs
malfunction of old collection new ones program
vehicles
Although the waste collection Enhancement of waste ditto ditto Ditto ditto The rate of final Promotion of
rate is 95.4%, the waste collection capacity by disposal reached proper 3Rs
9 Western Dehiwala Mt. MC collection service does not run replacement of old 94.1% and this causes program
Lavinia
on schedule due to malfunction collection vehicles to a heavy burden on the
of old collection vehicles. new ones final disposal site.
Although the waste collection Enhancement of waste The material Rehabilitation Open dumping Improvement of No 3R activities are Promotion of
rate is 74.5%, the illegal collection capacity by recovery facility of the material causes existing disposal carried out. proper 3Rs
Katunayake dumping rate is high (19.2%) replacement of old does not work. recovery environmental site program.
10 Western UC The waste collection service collection vehicles to facility issues to the
Seeduwa does not run on schedule due to new ones. surrounding
malfunction of old collection area.
vehicle.
6.2 Assistance in accordance with the inter-municipal treatment for Western
Province
6.2.1 Current situations and issues of solid waste management in Western
Province
a. Status of technical system and issues

The Western Province consists of three districts; Gampaha, Colombo and Kalutara from the
north. The population is 5.85 million which corresponds to 28.5 percent of the total population
of Sri Lanka in an area of 3,685km2, which corresponds to 5.6% of the country according to the
2012 census. The Colombo district, which is a centre of the politics and economics in Sri Lanka,
has a population of 2.32 million people and is the most densely populated.
Table6-3: Population and population density of the Western Province in 2012
Population Area Population density
District
(person) (km2) (persons/km2)
Colombo 2,324,349 699 3,325
Gampaha 2,304,833 1387 1,662
Kalutara 1,221,948 1598 765
Total 5,851,130 3,684 1,588
Source: Department of Census and Statistics
The Western province has 3 districts with a population of 5.9 million people which was
forecasted for the year 2015 based on the results of Population Census-2012. The waste
generation amount in 2015 is estimated to be 3,363 ton/day.
There are two regional final disposal sites - the Meethotamulla DS for the Colombo MC and
Coronnawa UC and the Karadiyana DS for seven municipalities - in the Colombo district, the
Western province. Other four municipalities are reducing the waste volume by composting,
however, each municipality disposes the collected waste and the residual waste from
composting to the vacant lot (Kaduwela MC's land has been identified as a disposal site), and all
of these vacant lots are open dumps.
Figure 6-1：Location of Meethotamulla, Karadiyana, Kaduwela final disposal site
243
Above: The Meethotamulla disposal site
Although the Colombo MC operates this disposal
site, the truck scale at the entrance is out of order.
Left: The Karadiyana disposal site

The disposal site used by seven municipalities is
operated by the WMA.
Compost plant of the Kaduwela MC Compost plant of the Bulathsinghala PS
Compost plant of the Kotikawatha PS Compost plant of the Agalawatha PS

Photo provided by Waste Management Authority
The Meethotamulla disposal site is an open dump located in the wetlands. Since this disposal
site is already full, and there is no land to expand, the Colombo MC has no choice but to pile up
about 700 tons of waste every day. Under such circumstances, the Colombo MC was
considering a plan to transport the collected waste to Puttalam, located in the northwest, about
130 km away, by train. Since the plan was deadlocked by the opposition of local people, the
Colombo MC has continued the landfill at the existing disposal sites. Since the environmental
impact on the surrounding areas caused by stench, waste scattering and the outflow of leachate
244
is serious, calls have been growing by the nearby residents to close down the disposal sites.
Urgent measures are desired.
The Karadiyana disposal site, which is also located in the wetlands, receives about 600 tons of
waste per day as of now. Details of the Karadiyana disposal site are as described in the
Moratuwa MC in Chapter 4.
For waste management in the Colombo Province, ensuring the final disposal site of a large
amount of waste generated in its overcrowded jurisdiction is the biggest challenge.
b.Financial conditions and issues
Among the three districts of the Western Province, the waste related problems in Colombo and
Gampaha districts are the most serious as both of the districts have been unable to secure land
for waste disposal facilities. Therefore, financial information of local authorities in the two
districts were collected during the 3rd field survey in order to identify the financial capabilities
of the local authorities.
According to the data collected during the survey, it can be considered that the financial
capabilities of the local authorities in the Colombo and Gampaha districts are relatively low.
The reasons for the conclusion are as follows:
 Operating profits at 9 out of the 13 local authorities in Colombo Districts and 14 out of
the 19 local authorities in Gampaha district were positive in 2014. However, the profits
in most of these local authorities were resulted by the grants allocated by the central
government. On the other hand, allocation of capital grants is highly dependent on the
financial condition of the central government; and thus, the amount of the allocated
capital grants should be neglected in order to identify the stability of the financial
conditions of local authorities. If the capital grants were neglected, operating profits
would be positive in 2 local authorities in Colombo (Dehiwala Mt. Lavinia MC and
Moratuwa MC) and 5 local authorities in Gampaha (Ja-Ela UC, Miniuvangoda UC,
Katunayake Seeduwa UC, Biyagama PS and Dompe PS) only. Therefore, the financial
conditions in most of the local authorities are not stable.
 Regarding the SWM finances, the amounts of collected waste fees in 8 out of 11 local
authorities of the Colombo district (number of total local authorities that presented
relevant data) and 13 out of 15 local authorities of the Gampaha district do not reach
10% of the SWM expenses. Even 2 local authorities in Colombo (Boralasgamuwa UC
and Seethawaka PS) and 8 local authorities in Gampaha (Negambo MC, Paliyagoda UC,
Attanagalla PS, Kalaniya PS, Mahara PS, Meerigama PS, Wattala PS and Miniuvangoda
PS) do not collect waste fees/tipping fees or the amounts of the collected waste
fees/tipping fees account for less than 1% of the SWM expenses. Therefore, it can be
concluded that sustainability of SWM activities has not been considered in all of the
local authorities.
The financial information of the local authorities is shown in the tables below.
245
Table 6-4: Financial information of local authorities in Colombo District for the fiscal year 2014 (Unit: thousand Rp)
Sri
Dehiwala Mt. Kolannawa Maharagama Boralasgamu Seethawakapura Seethawaka Kotiwatta-
No Financial Indicators Colombo MC Jayawardenapura Kaduwela MC Moratuwa MC Kesbewa UC Homagama PS Max Min Ave.
Lavinia MC UC UC wa UC UC PS Mulleriyawa PS
Kotte MC
1 Total Assets 13,842,006.06 645,095.55 1,041,573.51 278,173.72 645,436.77 348,570.15 138,901.29 212,186.38 869,079.32 267,765.38
2 Working Capital 135,818.72 (162,854.15) 616,624.29 40,782.29 306,201.13 129,355.88 (71,089.83) 36,332.25 161,524.21 17,742.59
3 Long-term Debt 82,914.50 19,818.71 41,751.10 2,221.54 4,210.66 0.00 164,082.63 20,888.03 5,099.28 0.00
4 Retained Earnings and Equity 8,376,293.05 139,547.37 777,619.97 114,445.19 453,711.50 247,723.56 188,911.17 53,936.95 334,479.83 99,670.18
5 Revenues:
5.1 Own-source revenues:
Rates & Taxes 2,823,982.38 198,368.91 137,544.10 339,880.35 82,163.41 37,606.04 66,099.69 84,256.35 27,982.25 13,125.79 13,613.20 52,615.43 49,942.72
Rents 219,744.01 23,202.86 11,995.82 16,973.41 11,016.26 11,156.42 13,538.71 20,671.48 2,107.06 24,834.93 16,965.80 10,307.19 13,638.72
Licenses 0.00 5,479.09 13,531.39 39,027.19 12,831.57 4,600.47 973.53 832.99 512.57 1,142.75 1,487.03 3,339.48 398.66
Fees for Services 553,315.18 58,296.95 61,208.30 63,544.54 19,608.93 15,376.37 6,748.61 56,123.29 5,848.68 6,810.97 8,645.19 17,060.62 11,170.17
Warrant Costs, Fines and
13,682.20 9,916.24 33,613.73 5,210.66 1,574.28 5,743.48 6,258.32 807.89 1,847.18 16,355.76 23,108.89 1,252.88
Penalties
Other Income 136,111.03 224,730.38 331,523.62 323,612.89 166,014.31 185,784.73 12,522.05 120,463.41 24,339.07 6,564.17 43,647.61 90,443.10 101,011.72
Sales of Capital Assets 23,019.42 2,087.12
Total Own-Source Revenues 3,733,152.60 523,760.39 565,719.49 816,652.11 296,845.15 256,098.32 105,626.07 288,605.83 61,597.50 77,345.21 100,714.59 198,961.83 177,414.88
5.2 Grants
Recurrent Grant (Block Grant) 2,566,246.69 247,959.13 146,909.98 483,287.03 240,983.40 51,635.73 95,291.07 69,457.14 37,499.79 45,831.36 51,021.63 94,882.70 44,285.30
Capital Grant 974,491.08 61,694.63 228,617.62 125,324.45 174,322.42 196,123.47 51,182.77 123,125.59 100,023.29 30,812.89 87,457.34 325,255.80 102,029.07
Total Grants 3,540,737.77 309,653.76 375,527.60 608,611.48 415,305.82 247,759.21 146,473.84 192,582.73 137,523.08 76,644.25 138,478.98 420,138.49 146,314.37
5.3 Total Revenues 7,273,890.38 833,414.16 941,247.09 1,425,263.58 712,150.96 503,857.52 252,099.91 481,188.57 199,120.59 153,989.46 239,193.57 619,100.33 323,729.26
246
6 Expenditures:
6.1 Recurrent Expenditures:
Personal Emoluments 3,011,347.96 335,253.98 171,465.70 649,466.84 322,940.25 53,599.61 124,698.15 101,239.83 44,194.29 59,388.31 70,889.47 71,260.28 89,900.80
Travelling Expenses 0.00 5,718.43 1,911.60 6,094.45 4,312.08 1,464.13 632.61 3,969.11 366.24 342.62 897.99 1,025.46 365.18
Supplies & Requisites 1,054,317.30 107,013.10 79,623.41 98,983.05 72,017.55 6,504.59 14,072.32 45,606.84 7,976.61 9,468.58 14,411.96 22,039.47 12,549.85
Repairs & Maintenance of
716,238.81 7,551.08 31,160.17 247,494.83 25,669.30 67,025.09 17,702.66 97,304.27 6,534.20 16,273.03 17,608.98 44,632.21 10,057.86
Capital Assets
Transportation, Communication,
0.00 180,487.38 82,194.81 120,608.63 27,950.53 16,804.36 8,038.98 53,577.25 14,846.52 9,686.16 17,923.63 23,085.10 25,749.85
Utility and Other Services
Payments, Dividends and
0.00 4,385.06 625.61 7,361.93 3,962.09 3,679.68 129.57 122.24 78.98 3,113.22 1,635.11 1,422.43 0.00
Bonuses
Grants, Contribution &
465,537.79 19,007.50 18,107.21 8,981.69 1,049.05 5,840.02 8,480.31 7,842.78 1,370.56 1,387.92 4,484.08 3,116.56 4,256.06
Subsidies
Retirement Benefits and Grati 0.00 2,740.63 1,946.22 10,262.94 3,344.55 160.69 1,173.02 313.79 0.00 1,620.01 1,520.56 688.62 385.50
Other Recurrent Expenditures 984,453.08 0.00 0.00 8,400.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Recurrent Expenditures 6,231,894.94 662,157.16 387,034.73 1,157,654.94 461,245.38 155,078.17 174,927.62 309,976.11 75,367.39 101,279.85 129,371.78 167,270.13 143,265.09
6.2 Capital Expenditures 2,434,756.96 363,219.59 461,974.63 63,478.89 3,997.49 236,473.62 63,272.04 324,980.08 103,826.27 51,832.74 109,423.75 484,103.85 163,056.65
6.3 Total Expenditures 8,666,651.90 1,025,376.75 849,009.36 1,221,133.83 465,242.87 391,551.79 238,199.65 634,956.19 179,193.66 153,112.59 238,795.53 651,373.97 306,321.73
7 Profit/Loss -1,392,761.53 -191,962.60 92,237.73 204,129.76 246,908.09 112,305.73 13,900.26 -153,767.63 19,926.92 876.87 398.03 -32,273.65 17,407.52
8 Population (psn) 1,047,100 121,831 248,023 233,290 198,693 166,191 55,285 180,112 64,491 31,779 129,582 240,565 130,000
9 Revenue per capita (Rps/Psn) 6,947 6,841 3,795 6,109 3,584 3,032 4,560 2,672 3,088 4,846 1,846 2,574 2,490 6,947 1,846 4,903
10 Expenditure per capita (Rps/Psn) 8,277 8,416 3,423 5,234 2,342 2,356 4,309 3,525 2,779 4,818 1,843 2,708 2,356 8,416 1,843 5,276
11 Profit/Loss per capita (Rps/Psn) -1,330 -1,576 372 875 1,243 676 251 -854 309 28 3 -134 134 1,243 -1,576 -373
Source: (1) Financial Data: Department of Local Government (Western Province); (2) Population: Results of Census-2012
Table 6-5: SWM finance of local authorities in Colombo District for the fiscal year 2014
Sri
Kaduwela Dehiwala Mt. Moratuwa Maharagama Boralasgamuwa Kolannawa Seethawaka Homagama
No Indicators Unit Colombo MC Jayawardenapura Kesbewa UC Max Min Ave.
MC Lavinia MC MC UC UC UC PS PS
Kotte MC
1 SWM Revenues:
Collected Waste Collection
1.1 000 Rps 22,139.40 12,380.00 9,412.70 14,882.89 8,511.30 3,043.07 5,475.50 0.00 1,800.00 117.00 251.70
Fees
1.2 Collected Tipping Fees 000 Rps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.90 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total SWM Revenues 000 Rps 22,139.40 12,380.00 9,412.70 14,882.89 8,511.30 3,043.07 5,475.50 28.90 1,800.00 117.00 251.70
2 SWM Expenditures:
2.1 Expenses of Final Disposal 000 Rps 121,244.10 8,550.10 32,202.00 32,522.55 15,712.71 4,262.60 1,700.00 0.00 2,780.70
2.2 Other Expenses (Collection) 000 Rps 1,171,482.90 107,460.10 36,182.50 248,811.08 135,794.83 41,163.50 17,146.20 20,228.90 6,000.00 21,588.70 12,809.30
Total SWM Expenditures 000 Rps 1,292,727.00 116,010.20 68,384.50 281,333.63 151,507.54 41,163.50 17,146.20 24,491.50 7,700.00 21,588.70 15,590.00
3 Profit/Loss of SWM Activities 000 Rps -1,270,587.60 -103,630.20 -58,971.80 -266,450.74 -142,996.23 -38,120.43 -11,670.70 -24,462.60 -5,900.00 -21,471.70 -15,338.30
4 Collection Amount ton/year 255,500 36,500 23,725 54,750 45,442 16,425 18,250 10,220 10,950 3,285 9,125
5 Average Revenue Rps/ton 87 339 397 272 187 185 300 3 164 36 28 397 3 161
6 Unit cost Rps/ton 5,060 3,178 2,882 5,139 3,334 2,506 940 2,396 703 6,572 1,708 6,572 703 4,209
6.1 Unit collection cost Rps/ton 4,585 2,944 1,525 4,544 2,988 2,506 940 1,979 548 6,572 1,404 6,572 548 3,756
6.2 Unit disposal cost Rps/ton 475 234 1,357 594 346 417 155 305 1,357 155 452
247
Note: SWM financial data of two municipalities (Kotiwatta-Mulleriyawa PS and Seethawakapura UC) are not included.
Source: (1) Financial Data: Department of Local Government (Western Province); (2) Collected Waste: Waste Management Authority (Western Province), 2013
Table 6-6: Financial information of local authorities in Gampaha District for the fiscal year 2014 (Unit: thousand Rp)
Paliyagoda Miniuvangoda Wattala Katunayake Attanagalla Meerigama Divulapitiya Miniuvangoda
No Financial Indicators Gampaha MC Negambo MC Ja-ela UC Biyagama PS Dompe PS Gampaha PS Ja-ela PS Kalaniya PS Mahara PS Wattala PS Katana PS Max Min Ave.
UC UC Mabola UC Seeduwa UC PS PS PS PS
1 Total Assets 516,457.12 644,450.38 112,698.86 116,225.96 93,936.15 201,480.53 899,927.77 246,255.13 446,243.81 485,781.92 772,790.01 487,211.69 362,744.29 358,580.85 449,209.98 445,807.25 587,087.39 633,398.63
2 Working Capital 91,868.47 303,872.58 27,748.54 (97.91) 37,953.71 89,355.95 92,466.63 75,232.32 94,972.13 85,225.53 6,789.31 23,035.93 37,357.99 17,780.19 6,649.50 (215,308.15) (232,915.75) (315,890.64)
3 Long-term Debt 90,957.18 126,642.08 1,412.55 1,412.55 14,978.10 1,500.83 22,281.67 1,412.77 5,717.12 1,909.64 538.08 30,331.13 0.00 2,115.05 21,706.20 7,967.07 1,412.55 42,172.79
Retained Earnings and
4 239,256.90 343,209.87 62,198.86 29,473.48 60,095.84 118,204.23 656,535.29 171,611.27 424,007.55 293,692.58 364,617.20 332,995.67 157,554.53 196,956.42 216,117.95 (37,501.62) 77,793.77 52,822.55
Equity
5 Revenues:
5.1 Own-source revenues:
Rates & Taxes 61,574.40 147,149.90 16,201.60 39,889.20 10,394.80 54,984.20 94,771.22 18,647.20 63,204.80 8,255.90 17,175.30 38,752.50 58,209.50 9,619.30 8,160.30 78,183.20 10,215.90 34,604.30 21,665.50
Rents 23,425.70 17,799.60 6,423.20 2,281.20 16,683.80 11,395.30 9,941.28 10,710.00 3,301.40 8,939.90 5,789.70 12,908.60 10,090.10 2,876.00 13,866.80 9,266.70 5,386.00 1,023.20 3,383.90
Licenses 3,869.50 28,557.00 511.50 823.30 1,152.40 2,371.40 3,251.10 2,138.90 730.40 1,595.00 785.50 4,407.60 7,093.40 2,403.90 1,100.90 2,938.20 521.60 926.90 1,690.10
Fees for Services 18,774.80 25,933.60 2,439.80 1,702.20 4,206.90 584.30 6,941.16 7,319.90 8,654.90 16,267.10 6,184.90 8,213.90 127,861.70 9,146.40 3,150.70 5,976.10 4,340.40 6,438.70 5,378.50
Warrant Costs, Fines
10,861.50 8,702.70 1,852.50 2,469.80 601.30 12,491.80 388.88 628.40 5,778.70 1,807.70 7,622.00 7,002.40 5,251.10 906.80 2,513.90 9,470.80 9,501.10 15,722.80 2,094.20
and Penalties
Other Income 49,075.20 150,097.10 22,267.90 8,066.70 4,893.10 56,704.70 33,690.72 116,000.20 3,926.10 50,307.90 3,641.50 4,876.10 1,168.50 3,174.40 1,705.70 115,038.70 3,234.50 1,692.90 4,704.90
Sales of Capital Assets 37,131.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 147.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,093.90 0.00
Total Own-Source
204,712.40 378,239.90 49,696.50 55,232.40 37,932.30 138,531.70 148,984.36 155,592.30 85,596.30 87,173.50 41,198.90 76,161.10 209,674.30 28,126.80 30,498.30 220,873.70 33,199.50 61,502.70 38,917.10
Revenues
5.2 Grants
Recurrent Grant (Block
87,535.00 165,350.30 32,357.50 32,215.90 25,618.00 48,320.60 40,204.92 68,795.70 162,358.40 56,622.40 121,484.30 191,616.70 60,813.90 161,535.00 102,907.70 45,799.00 99,006.70 185,069.60 87,479.50
Grant)
Capital Grant 79,330.40 89,696.10 894.00 9,265.40 5,724.10 28,252.10 2,336.53 355,145.60 0.00 10,757.90 207,447.40 280,376.80 68,188.20 292,089.80 216,600.60 219,503.00 252,314.80 164,621.10 257,917.20
Other Capital Revenues 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,355.50 0.00 9,986.50 7,252.40 6,982.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,793.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Grants 166,865.40 255,046.40 33,251.50 41,481.30 34,697.60 76,572.70 42,541.45 433,927.80 169,610.80 74,363.10 328,931.70 471,993.50 129,002.10 453,624.80 321,301.70 265,302.00 351,321.50 349,690.70 345,396.70
5.3 Total Revenues 371,577.80 633,286.30 82,948.00 96,713.70 72,629.90 215,104.40 191,525.82 589,520.10 255,207.10 161,536.60 370,130.60 548,154.60 338,676.40 481,751.60 351,800.00 486,175.70 384,521.00 411,193.40 384,313.80
6 Expenditures:
248
6.1 Recurrent Expenditures:
Personal Emoluments 101,400.70 213,663.90 39,343.60 43,019.70 32,958.70 57,245.60 70,304.18 88,021.50 65,456.00 64,510.30 53,690.30 65,209.20 82,425.90 62,479.30 57,814.50 68,969.80 69,629.80 64,495.50 39,630.10
Travelling Expenses 4,070.30 5,438.00 253.10 1,945.30 818.70 1,856.40 99.65 1,474.20 615.40 435.10 719.00 3,163.40 3,038.30 697.60 1,350.70 794.00 858.50 4,743.20 1,056.40
Supplies & Requisites 21,760.50 39,949.00 4,145.40 4,837.80 6,468.40 5,643.30 22,515.94 26,024.70 14,437.10 13,664.00 14,668.20 21,569.00 24,684.00 15,294.00 10,393.80 21,044.80 15,890.00 21,940.50 9,676.50
Repairs & Maintenance
25,381.10 14,954.90 3,398.30 12,402.00 13,967.80 74,693.50 22,998.23 50,289.00 94,766.80 16,446.60 13,871.10 37,548.80 139,405.40 40,361.70 16,790.00 91,528.80 5,597.20 66,115.90 22,393.40
of Capital Assets
Transportation,
Communication, Utility 45,244.90 123,788.90 12,493.40 11,679.80 6,703.80 11,510.10 19,246.34 19,198.90 44,646.00 5,179.30 15,962.70 29,456.30 22,516.70 27,774.40 12,829.10 15,383.80 5,498.90 2,519.40 8,428.10
and Other Services
Payments of Interests,
11,468.60 17,855.00 2,341.70 2,253.00 1,326.10 622.70 0.00 2,332.30 0.00 624.70 640.20 488.80 2,437.20 623.90 74.20 3,048.20 1,129.10 8,744.80 2,199.80
Dividends and Bonuses
Grants, Contribution &
4,144.30 24,247.40 397.50 151.30 456.90 3,766.80 689.31 5,813.50 2,221.90 1,460.70 7,363.20 7,118.80 15,277.50 189.90 1,229.80 3,858.20 796.50 3,347.80 6,113.30
Subsidies
Pensions, retirements,
565.30 1,512.20 503.10 427.00 745.60 719.70 2,426.14 617.30 226.50 482.50 455.50 2,689.90 861.10 590.60 772.30 1,507.30 2,069.50 602.20 102.10
benefits and gratuities
Other Recurrent
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 465.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Expenditures
Total Recurrent
214,035.70 441,409.30 62,876.10 76,715.90 63,911.80 156,058.10 138,279.79 193,771.40 222,369.70 102,803.20 107,370.20 167,244.20 290,646.10 148,011.40 101,254.40 206,134.90 101,469.50 172,509.30 89,599.70
Expenditures
6.2 Capital Expenditures 156,355.40 233,889.20 13,698.80 17,076.00 1,375.40 32,653.80 2,122.21 390,873.80 19,728.30 11,106.60 275,334.70 327,962.30 83,861.40 338,786.30 243,507.10 224,464.30 294,824.80 222,078.80 276,040.10
6.3 Total Expenditures 370,391.10 675,298.50 76,574.90 93,791.90 65,287.20 188,711.90 140,402.00 584,645.20 242,098.00 113,909.80 382,704.90 495,206.50 374,507.50 486,797.70 344,761.50 430,599.20 396,294.30 394,588.10 365,639.80
7 Profit/Loss 1,186.70 -42,012.20 6,373.10 2,921.80 7,342.70 26,392.50 51,123.82 4,874.90 13,109.10 47,626.80 -12,574.30 52,948.10 -35,831.10 -5,046.10 7,038.50 55,576.50 -11,773.30 16,605.30 18,674.00
8 Population (psn) 63,260 155,000 35,734 34,568 9,283 29,937 97,196 175,795 177,841 150,385 118,206 226,093 117,005 184,441 166,945 148,192 146,203 233,616 160,763
Revenue per capita

9 5,874 4,086 2,321 2,798 7,824 7,185 1,971 3,353 1,435 1,074 3,131 2,424 2,895 2,612 2,107 3,281 2,630 1,760 2,391 7,824 1,074 2,644
(Rps/Psn)
Expenditure per capita
10 5,855 4,357 2,143 2,713 7,033 6,304 1,445 3,326 1,361 757 3,238 2,190 3,201 2,639 2,065 2,906 2,711 1,689 2,274 7,033 757 2,560
(Rps/Psn)
Profit/Loss per capita
11 19 -271 178 85 791 882 526 28 74 317 -106 234 -306 -27 42 375 -81 71 116 882 -306 84
(Rps/Psn)
Source: (1) Financial Data: Department of Local Government (Western Province); (2) Population: Results of Census-2012
Table 6-7: SWM finance of local authorities in Gampaha District for the fiscal year 2014
Paliyagoda Miniuvangoda Wattala Katunayake Attanagalla Biyagama Dompe Gampaha

No Indicators Unit Gampaha MC Negambo MC Ja-ela UC
UC UC Mabola UC Seeduwa UC PS PS PS PS
1 SWM Revenues:
1.1 000 Rps 567.53 556.50 34.00 12.85 10.06 1,692.45 107.00 17.38
Fees
1.2 Collected Tipping Fees 000 Rps 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,038.80 0.00 0.00
Total SWM Revenues 000 Rps 567.53 556.50 34.00 12.85 1,048.86 1,692.45 107.00 17.38
2 SWM Expenditures:
2.1 Expenses of Final Disposal 000 Rps 0.00 0.00 914.21 2,487.24 0.00 7,200.00 406.25
2.2 Other Expenses (Collection) 000 Rps 21,166.30 3,288.01 32.84 155.94 40,933.85 11,188.39 0.00
Total SWM Expenditures 000 Rps 92,189.50 21,166.30 3,288.01 947.06 2,643.18 40,933.85 18,388.39 406.25
3 Profit/Loss of SWM Activities 000 Rps -91,621.98 -20,609.80 -3,254.01 -934.20 -1,594.32 -39,241.41 -18,281.39 -388.87
4 Collection Amount ton/year 27,375 7,300 5,475 1,643 5,475 14,600 5,475 3,650
5 Average Revenue Rps/ton 21 76 6 8 192 116 20 5
6 Unit cost Rps/ton 3,368 2,899 601 577 483 2,804 3,359 111
6.1 Unit collection cost Rps/ton 2,899 601 20 28 2,804 2,044
249
6.2 Unit disposal cost Rps/ton 0 557 454 0 1,315 111
Meerigama Divulapitiya Miniuvangoda

No Indicators Unit Ja-ela PS Kalaniya PS Mahara PS Wattala PS Katana PS Max Min Ave.
PS PS PS
1 SWM Revenues:
1.1 000 Rps 361,715.45 14.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 185.09 580.04 0.00
Fees
1.2 Collected Tipping Fees 000 Rps 295.29 43.80 31.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total SWM Revenues 000 Rps 362,010.74 58.30 31.72 0.00 0.00 185.09 580.04 0.00
2 SWM Expenditures:
2.1 Expenses of Final Disposal 000 Rps 9,297.18 10,348.40 4,184.57 2,799.50 0.00 3,885.07 0.00
2.2 Other Expenses (Collection) 000 Rps 38,969.08 4,529.80 12,243.92 9,906.32 314.09 10,594.37 8,544.95
Total SWM Expenditures 000 Rps 34,097.50 48,266.26 14,878.20 16,428.49 12,705.82 314.09 14,479.44 8,544.95
3 Profit/Loss of SWM Activities 000 Rps 327,913.24 -48,207.96 -14,846.49 -16,428.49 -12,705.82 -129.00 -13,899.41 -8,544.95
4 Collection Amount ton/year 12,775 4,380 3,650 12,410 2,190 4,563 3,650
5 Average Revenue Rps/ton 5 7 0 0 85 127 0 192 0 3,201
6 Unit cost Rps/ton 3,778 3,397 4,501 1,024 143 3,174 2,341 4,501 111 2,877
6.1 Unit collection cost Rps/ton 3,050 1,034 3,354 798 143 2,322 2,341 3,354 20 1,412
6.2 Unit disposal cost Rps/ton 728 2,363 1,146 226 0 852 0 2,363 0 362
Note: (1) Data of Gampaha MC, Biyagama PS and Dompe PS are not included. (2) Data of Ja-ela PS were neglected due to its odd value for collected waste fees.
Source: (1) Financial Data: Department of Local Government (Western Province); (2) Collected Waste: Waste Management Authority (Western Province), 2013
6.2.2 Future generation amount of municipal solid waste in the Western

province
The future generation amounts in the Western province for 10 years from 2015 to 2024 are
estimated as follows.
a. Population forecast
The population of 2015 was estimated using the population growth rate estimated by the
Register General’s Department and the results of the census conducted in 2012. The
forecasted values for the years 2016 and 2024 was estimated based on the data of population
forecasted by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Table 6-8: The population growth rate for the Western province
Years Sri Lanka Colombo Gampaha Kalutara
2012 1 1 1 1
2013 0.76% 0.47% 0.52% 0.57%
2014 0.93% 0.68% 0.65% 0.73%
2015 0.85% 0.58% 0.58% 0.65%
2016 0.46% 0.46% 0.46% 0.46%
2017 0.45% 0.45% 0.45% 0.45%
2018 0.44% 0.44% 0.44% 0.44%
2019 0.40% 0.40% 0.40% 0.40%
2020 0.36% 0.36% 0.36% 0.36%
2021 0.32% 0.32% 0.32% 0.32%
2022 0.28% 0.28% 0.28% 0.28%
2023 0.24% 0.24% 0.24% 0.24%
2024 0.21% 0.21% 0.21% 0.21%
Source of 2012 - 2015: Registrar General's Department
Note: Mid-year Population estimates were revised based on final results of the Census of Population and
housing 2012. District level figures are given on the basis of usual residence.
Source after 2015: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division
(2015). World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision
Table 6-9: The future population of the Western province

District Western Province Colombo Gampaha Kalutara
2012 5,851,130 2,324,349 2,304,833 1,221,948
2013 5,881,054 2,335,322 2,316,801 1,228,931
2014 5,920,953 2,351,284 2,331,761 1,237,908
2015 5,956,176 2,364,868 2,345,343 1,245,966
2016 5,983,724 2,375,805 2,356,190 1,251,729
2017 6,010,901 2,386,595 2,366,891 1,257,414
2018 6,037,107 2,397,001 2,377,210 1,262,896
2019 6,061,475 2,406,676 2,386,806 1,267,994
2020 6,083,382 2,415,374 2,395,432 1,272,576
2021 6,102,648 2,423,023 2,403,018 1,276,606
2022 6,119,475 2,429,704 2,409,644 1,280,126
2023 6,134,085 2,435,505 2,415,397 1,283,183
2024 6,146,854 2,440,575 2,420,425 1,285,854
250
b. Future waste generation amounts

The future waste generation rates were estimated using the following data: (1) The current
generation rate of the Colombo district identified in the Chapter 4 of this report, (2)
Generation rate calculated from the waste generation amounts in Gampaha and Kalutara
districts in 2013 provided by the WMA and the population data of respective districts, and (3)
The estimated economic growth rates.
The future waste generation rates for the Western province are shown in the table below.
Table 6-10: Estimated future waste generation rates for the Western province (Unit:
g/person/day)
District Colombo*1 Gampaha*2 Kalutara*2 Western
2015 708 480 452 565
2016 719 493 464 577
2017 730 507 477 589
2018 741 521 490 602
2019 753 535 503 615
2020 764 550 517 628
2021 778 565 531 642
2022 791 581 546 657
2023 805 597 561 672
2024 819 613 576 687
*1： The rates for the Colombo districts were estimated based on the generation rates of Dehiwala Mt. MC,
Moratuwa MC and Kesbewa UC.
*2： The rates for the Gampaha and Kalutara districts were estimated by multiplying the current generation
rates, which was calculated from the waste generation amount in the districts in 2013 provided by the
WMA and the population data of the respective districts in the year, by a calculation factor that equals
to 55% of GDP growth rate (please refer to 5.2.1 for detailed information).
Using the above generation rates, the waste generation amounts for the years from 2015 to
2024 were estimated. As a result, the waste generation amount in the Western province is
expected to increase by 25.6% for the following 10 years from the current 3,363 ton/day of
2015 to 4,223 ton/day. In addition, the generation amount in the Colombo district accounts
for 49.8% of the total amount of the province in 2015, the share is expected to decrease to
47.3% by 2024 due to the expected increase of the generation amounts in the Gampaha and
Kalutara districts.
Table 6-11: Future waste generation amounts for the Western province (unit: ton/day)
Years Colombo Gampaha Kalutara Western
2015 1,674 1,126 563 3,363
2016 1,708 1,162 581 3,451
2017 1,742 1,200 600 3,542
2018 1,776 1,239 619 3,634
2019 1,812 1,277 638 3,727
2020 1,845 1,317 658 3,821
2021 1,885 1,358 678 3,921
2022 1,922 1,400 699 4,021
2023 1,961 1,442 720 4,122
2024 1,999 1,484 741 4,223
Source: JICA Study
251
6.2.3 Study on the intermediate treatment in Colombo District

a. Target waste amount of the intermediate treatment
Among the treatment facilities planned by the WMA (, the design capacities of the three
facilities being planned in the Colombo district were compared with the waste generation
amounts estimated above. The results of the comparison are shown in the table below. In the
facility planning in Japan, its treatment capacity is determined by using the predicted value of
the 7 to 10 years later. Therefore, 2024 estimates are targeted here.
Table6-12: Disposal amount of three sites in Colombo District (Unit: ton/day)
Disposal site Plan 2015 2020 2024
Meethotamulla DS 695 570 637 698
Karadiyana DS 595* 769 842 909
Kaduwela DS 560 335 365 392
Total 1,850 1,674 1,845 1,999
*: It doesn't include the incineration amount of landfilled waste (250 ton/day).
The total capacity of the intermediate treatment facilities that the WMA plans is 1,850 tons /
day. Since it is equivalent to 93% of the 2024 generation amount, it is roughly speaking a
reasonable scale. However, the processing capacity of the facility planned for the Karadiyana
DS is 81% short of the target amount of waste, while the facility of the Kaduwela DS exceeds
the target amount by up to 78 percent. Therefore it is necessary to reset the respective
treatment capacities according to the location of the assumed facilities, the distance from the
municipalities that use the facility and the waste amount.
On the other hand, treatment facilities such as incineration plants that enable drastic reduction
of waste are indispensable considering the existence of many local authorities also in
Gampaha district that have been experiencing final disposal problems and the expected
increase in the waste generation by 2024 (1,500 ton/day). For this reason, the UDA plan for
intermediate treatment facilities can be considered appropriate as it will cover the Gampaha
district.
Based on the above, it is preferable that the processing capacity of intermediate treatment
facilities should be sufficient for treating all waste to be generated in the Colombo district
(2,000 ton/day) along with a half of the waste to be generated in the Gampaha district (750
ton/day).
b. Waste characteristics for intermediate treatment
It is indispensable to understand the characteristics of waste when examining the intermediate
treatment facilities. The waste amount and composition survey, which used municipal waste
that had been carried from the Moratuwa MC, was conducted from October 15 to the 21st in
the Karadiyana disposal site as mentioned above. In order to examine incineration and
composting as an intermediate treatment method, the three components and the C / N ratio
were obtained by chemical analysis of the samples on the 16th, 19th and 20th of October
2015 which was carried out as part of the survey.
b.1 Low calorific value
(1) Waste composition analysis
As a result of the physical composition analysis, the physical composition of the object waste
was as shown in the table below.
252
Table6-13: Physical composition of object garbage

Category Rate
Kitchen waste 52.55%
Paper 13.56%
Textile 4.32%
Grass & wood 14.06%
Soft plastic 9.15%
Hard plastic 1.37%
Incombustible 4.28%
Others 0.14%
Total 100.00%
(2) Ash
The weight after it dried and after strong heating was measured, excluding nonflammable
items among the nine compositions of the above table, and the mineral was calculated by the
following formula:.
(kg) × weight (kg)/after ..mineral (%) of each composition = (.. ..strong.. heating100 in
weight before ..strong.. heating
(%) ..mineral.. = of dry garbage
Ai: Weight ratio of each composition (%)

Bi: Mineral (%) of each composition i (Nonflammable things are assumed to be
100.)
Ash contents of garbage (%) = Dried garbage × ((100-moisture (%)) /100)
(3) Combustibles contents

Combustibles contents were calculated by the following formula:
Combustibles contents (%) =100-moisture (%) –Ash contents of garbage
(4) Low calorific value

The low calorific value of garbage was presumed by the following formula:
HI = 4,500V - 600W
HI : Low calorific value of garbage (kcal/kg)
V: Combustibles contents (%) of garbage...
W: Moisture contents of garbage (%)
The result of the analysis by using the above-mentioned calculating formula is shown in
the table below.
Table6-14: Calculation of low calorific value
Dry garbage Garbage ..garbage
Sample Moisture mineral mineral combustion.. Lower heating value
(%) (%) (%) (%) (Kcal/kg) (kJ/kg)
October 16 52.24 24.13 11.53 36.24 1,317 5,514
October 19 55.83 22.76 10.05 34.12 1,200 5,024
October 20 43.54 14.75 8.33 48.13 1,905 7,973
253
Based on the results of the incineration facilities in Japan, it is understood that the
self-sustaining combustion limit is about 900kcal/kg, 1200kcal/kg is necessary for a stable
operation. Power generation limit is said to be 1500-1600kcal / kg or more. From the fact that
all low calorific values that had been calculated exceeded the self-sustaining combustion limit,
the characteristic of solid waste generated in the Colombo District can be incinerated in a
stable manner without using a supplementary fuel.
Since the WMA is promoting the separate collection of organic waste, other waste will be the
target incineration waste. Power generation is possible because the low calorific value of the
other waste is calculated as 2,280kcal/kg.
b.2 C/N ratio

The ratio of carbon (C) content (%) and nitrogen (N) content (%) in the organic material is
the C / N ratio. The C / N ratio takes different values depending on the type of organic matter;
it is an important indicator for evaluating such difficulties as microbial degradation of organic
matter, ease of appearance of fertilizer effects and ripening conditions of compost. In general,
20-30 is said to be the best C/N ratio for making compost. .
The average value of the C / N ratio of organic waste is as shown in the table below. It was
confirmed that the organic waste in the solid waste generated in the Colombo District is
suitable for composting.
Table6-15: C/N ratio of organic garbage
Organic garbage C/N ratio
Kitchen dirt garbage 25.3
Plant 48.8
Source: JICA investigation
b.3 Recyclables contents

From the results of the waste amount and composition survey (WACS), it was confirmed that
recyclables which can be targeted as material recovery total 16.9%, as shown in the table
below in the municipal solid waste generated in the Colombo District.
An important thing for recycling is to avoid mixing impurities and to collect it by a uniform
material. For this reason, it is necessary to establish a mechanism of separate collection and
thorough separation at generation sources. The source separation of organic waste and other
waste and the separate collection corresponding to it has been started in the Moratuwa MC
from January 2015. And the same system is scheduled for introduction in the Dehiwala-Mt
Lavinia MC in 2016. This aims to exclude organic waste from the municipal waste to be
landfilled through composting. At the same time, source separation of organic waste prevents
the contamination of organic matter into the recyclable waste. Therefore, introduction of
MRF (Material Recovery Facility) is also a valid system for material recovery.
254
Table6-16: Possibility of the middle processing seen from refuse composition

Classification Composition rate Use
Kitchen waste 52.5%
66.6% Compost, Biogas, etc.
Grass & wood 14.1%
Paper 13.6%
Hard Plastics 1.4%
16.9% Material recovery
Metal 0.7%
Soft Plastics 9.1%
Textiles 4.3% 14.0% Thermal recycle
2.5% Residue
Other 0.1%
Total 100.0%
c. Intermediate treatment in Japan

Based on the results of the chemical analysis and the waste composition survey, it has been
understood that incineration + power generation, compost, and material recovery are
technically possible and effective as the intermediate treatment of solid waste in the Colombo
district.
Therefore, we would like to introduce the current situation and the study on trend towards the
material cycle society in Japan that the advanced technology of the intermediate treatment
has established, and the statistical documentation of facilities for examination to introduce the
intermediate treatment facilities.
c.1 Research by Japan Society of Material Cycles and Waste Management

Experts
The incineration research subcommittee analyzed the current tendency for disorderly
approaches to intermediate treatment of municipal waste in a research debate organized by
the Japan Society of Material Cycles and Waste Management in May 2005. According to the
report, the way of intermediate treatment aiming to establish a material cycle society should
take a soft approach over a hard overemphasis.
(1) Tendency of current hard overemphasis
High cost, High energy
Receive any waste and
Waste Consciousness of
treat
residents remains low
(2) Emphasis on a soft approach in the future
255
Recyclables Recycle
Waste
Waste that is
not suitable for Incineration/Biogas, etc.
recycling
Unrecyclables
→　Control at upstream is required
Source separation Low cost, low energy
Public cooperation is a key
There are various options in the intermediate treatment of municipal waste, and the best
treatment method should be selected taking into consideration the particular characteristics of
the waste stream.
Incineration Electricity
Residue
RDF Electricity
Residue
Combustible waste Collection Carbonization Fuel

Organic waste Collection Residue
Biogas Electricity
Residue
Composting Compost
Residue
Figure 6-1: A variety of intermediate treatment methods of municipal solid waste

The experts forecasted the future waste composition, classified the intermediate treatment
methods shown in the table below and examined from the viewpoint of the cost, energy, CO2,
the disposal amount and hazardous matter.
The separation of container and packaging means that the local authority selects the target
recyclables among the ten kinds of recyclable materials which the central government has
determined according to the Containers and Packaging Recycling Law, and makes the
separate collection plan and executes it.
Table6-17: Case study
Collection Mode of Facilities scale
Object waste form processing Incineration Biogas
Mixed Incineration (ash
Case 0 Present waste 100 -
collection melt)
Future waste scenario1 Mixed Incineration (ash
Case 1 (sorting packaging and 86 -
collection melt)
containers progresses)
Organic waste
Future waste scenario2 is separated at
Case 2 (sorting packaging and source and Incineration + 58 28
containers progresses) collected Biogasification
separately
*In Case1~2: All municipalities execute the separated waste collection to the container wrapping, and the rate of public
cooperation is assumed as 80%.
*In Case 2, Public cooperation rate for organic waste separation is assumed as 90%.
256
The figure below shows the change of waste for incineration to mixed waste to the separation
of the recyclable waste and the separation of organic waste. Comparing Case0 and Case1, the
waste amount decreases by separation of container and packaging, however, the low calorific
value decreases. When Case1 is compared with Case2, it is understood that the low calorific
value is regained through extraction of organic waste. Moreover, it is understood that the
waste amount for incineration can be reduced to about 60% by the separation of a container
and packaging materials and organic garbage.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Incineration LCV
Case 0:　Incineration 100% 8,100 kJ/kg
Case 1:　Incineration
86% 6,400 kJ/kg
(Recyclables sorting)
Case 2:　Incineration + Biogas 58% 7,500 kJ/kg
LCV: Low calorific value

Combustibles Baio residue Organic Container & packeging
Figure 6-2: Forecast of quality of garbage for incineration

The total for the initial investment and operating costs are compared in the report. The cost of
Case0 was assumed to be a 100%, Case1 91% and Case2 about 94%. Moreover, the unit
treatment cost of the targeted waste is shown in the table below. Case0 increases the amount
of treatment for the total amount of incineration of mixed waste, the total cost is the highest.
In Case 2, the initial investment and operation cost of intermediate treatment facilities is
reduced because the target treatment amount is reduced by separation. However, since the
cost for separate collection is high, the total unit cost is the highest.
Table6-18: Cost of each case
Case Cost per ton
Case 0 24,257 ¥/ton
Case 1 25,655 ¥/ton
Case 2 26,437 ¥/ton
The debate has looked at the viewpoints of cost, energy, CO2, disposal amount, and the
hazardous substance (Lead and chlorine) as follows, and it was concluded that there is
superiority in Case2 (incineration + biogas).
 In each item of the cost energy and CO2, the combination of incineration (ash
melt) and biogas is advantageous.
 There is no difference in the disposal amount of Case1 and 2.
 The load of the reclamation of chlorine by the bio gasification.
c.2 Incinerators
As of 2013, 1,199 incinerators were running in Japan, and among these, 587 had a treatment
capacity of 100 ton/day or more. These breakdowns are shown in the table below. Among
furnace type of incinerators with less than 500 ton/day of treatment capacity, 68% are stoker
type incinerators and 22% are fluidized bed type incinerators. As the treatment capacity
increased, stoker type incinerators also increased. All incinerators with a capacity of 1000
ton/day or more adopt stoker furnaces. Most of the incinerators with a treatment capacity of
500 ton/day or more operate continuously and utilize residual heat to generate power.
Since securing final disposal sites are extremely difficult in Japan, the ash, which is the
residue of incineration, is melted in a melting furnace which was annexed to the incinerator
and is re-used as an aggregate of concrete (Shaft type incinerator continuously treats the
waste from incineration to melting). However, since the cost of melting is high, installation
of melting furnaces tend to be on the decline in recent years..
257
Table6-19: Number of incinerators by capacity in Japan

Incineration method 100 - 499 ton/day 500 - 999 ton/day > 1000 ton/day
Mechanical stoker type
355 59 6
(movability)
Shaft-furnace type 35 3
Flow floor type 112 1
Rotary 11
Others 5
Total 518 63 6
Source: Municipal waste processing investigation of actual conditions result of the Ministry of the Environment, 2013
c.3 Bio gasification

There were six bio-gasification plants running in Japan in 2013. The breakdown is as shown
in the table below.
Table6-20: Number of bio-gasification plants in Japan
Treatment capacity Use first year
For power generation 80 ton/day 2006
For power generation/fuel 65 ton/day 2013
For fuel 17 ton/day 2011
For power generation Seven ton/day 2006
Source: Municipal waste processing investigation of actual conditions result of the Ministry of the Environment, 2013
d. Validity of development plan of intermediate treatment facilities in

Colombo District
d.1 Considerations related with the current development concept

(1) Differences between the UDA and WMA plans regarding treatment of the
Colombo MC waste
 The UDA is planning to compact the CMC waste, put it into containers and transport
to the sanitary landfill site planned in Muthurajawella.
 As for the WMA, it is considering to process the organic part of the CMC waste at the
biogas plant of Muthurajawella and incinerate the remaining inorganic part at the
incineration plant to be constructed in Muthurajawella. According to this plan, only
ash will be transported to the Puttalam disposal site.
Although both concepts planned to construct the final disposal site in Puttalam, the treatment
method for municipal solid waste of the CMC differs.
Considering the efficiency of volume reduction near generation sources, the WMA plan is
preferable. However, it is doubtful to promote intermediate treatment facility projects
relying on private finances while the construction of a sanitary landfill site in Puttalam has
not been decided completely.
As mentioned above, the basic principle of waste treatment of the municipal solid waste to be
collected in the Colombo MC differs between the plans of the concerned authorities; however,
neither of them revealed a concrete plan about waste treatment for the Colombo MC.
258
(2) Response by the Colombo MC
 The Colombo MC has been waiting for the results of the projects that the UDA is
promoting.
 However, the project needs at least two years to be implemented; and therefore, the
Colombo MC is intending to obtain additional land located at the Meethothamulla
disposal site to secure the disposal of waste during the following two years. Since
there are many households resided (illegally) in the area planned for this purpose, the
MC intends to pay compensations for relation of these residents.
 At the same time with observing the plans by the UDA and the WMA, the Colombo
MC is intending to select a contractor for to dig out the landfilled waste at the
Meethothamulla disposal site in order to extend the lifetime of the site. After digging,
the extracted waste will be used for burying the wetlands owned by residents around
the Meethothamulla disposal site.
(3) About initial investments and O & M costs required for intermediate
treatment facilities
 The UDA, the WMA and the Colombo MC are aware that intermediate treatment
facilities such as incineration and biogas plants require huge investments and
expensive O & M costs. Therefore, government organizations are expecting utilization
of private finances for construction of these kinds of facilities instead of public
investments.
 Local authorities collect waste fees only from business entities. Although officials in
charge of SWM at local authorities are aware of the necessity to collect waste fees
from households in order to ensure financial resources for implementation of a proper
waste treatment, they do not try commencement of fee collection from all generation
sources as they think politicians do not approve the idea.
 Although necessities of intermediate waste treatment facilities for solving waste
management problems in the Western province have recognized at all level of
governance, development of intermediate treatment facilities by public initiatives have
not been realized.
d.2 Validity of the current development concepts

(1) Conclusion
As mentioned above, it was confirmed that the quality of the municipal solid waste, which
was sampled at the Karadiyana disposal site, meets the incineration and composting
processes. Also, as in the study of the Japan Society of Material Cycles and Waste
Management, the superiority of a combination of incineration and biogas is shown as a way
of intermediate treatment toward a material-cycles society.
The intermediate treatment facility development plan of the WMA is to construct combined
facilities of an incinerator and a biogas plant at existing disposal sites; and thus, it is
considered as a technically reasonable solution.
In western province, officials in charge of SWM at all levels of government are aware of
necessity of drastic waste reduction through an intermediate treatment such as incineration.
The Sri Lankan side has been relying on private investments for introduction of this kind of
facilities due to the insufficiency of SWM financial capabilities of local authorities. However,
a municipal solid waste treatment system that is solely dependent on private investments
results in high burden on residents when it tries to regain the initial investments. As a proper
allocation of roles and responsibilities between public and private sectors is indispensable to
establish a sound SWM system, it is necessary that the government should prepare a
259
long-term plan and select a set of priority projects. Moreover, it is also necessary to select the
most appropriate waste treatment method among various possibilities taking the local
conditions into account and implement feasibility studies in order to formulate a financial
system that could cover initial investments and O & M costs of the proposed facilities.
(2) Consensus building among stakeholders
In the Western province, municipalities are responsible for waste charge, collection and
transportation, WMA is responsible for the operation of the final disposal. Intermediate
treatment facility development plan of WMA is based on the premise that it be located in the
existing disposal site. Intermediate treatment facility development plan of WMA is based on
the premise that it be located in the existing disposal site. According to the experience of
SWM in Tokyo, the citizen had refused to be forced to receive the waste generated in other
place, and opposed the cluster disposal facility which the Metropolitan Government had
developed. Consequently, the principle that the waste should be treated within the area the
waste generated was established. Referring these experiences, it is necessary to make
consensus among stakeholders about the followings to develop the intermediate treatment
facilities.
(1) Regional treatment or individual treatment
(2) Securing the site for the facility
(3) Mechanism of cost sharing in case of regional treatment
 Initial investment cost (subsidy from central government and burden of local
authorities)
 Operation cost (Share of municipality that uses it)
(3) Implementation
Since the targeted intermediate treatment facilities in the plan are not in Sri Lanka, there is a
need to develop a detailed plan under the technical assistance from countries with proven
track record on this field such as Japan. When the Sri Lankan side will request a technical
assistant, consensus building among stakeholders is a prerequisite as mentioned above.
Since there are a number of options in the facility, it is recommended to conduct a
pre-feasibility study in order to select the most appropriate treatment method. It is important
that the agreement among the stakeholders including the residents is made after each
stakeholder grasps the scale of the cost burden based on the results of pre-feasibility study.
Then full-scale feasibility study is carried out, specific implementation steps toward
commercialization is determined.
260
6.3 Assistance for Local Authorities in other than Western Province
6.3.1 Issues of Solid Waste Management of local authorities in other than

Western Province
a. Issues of technical system
The local authorities in other than Western Province are divided into two categories as
follows in accordance with the issues of solid waste management.
Category A：There are issues of discharge, collection, transportation and/or issue of
disposal of waste.
Category B ： There are issues of waste volume reduction, material recycling,
intermediate treatment, 3Rs and so on, although the discharge, collection,
transportation are moderately managed.
The category and issues of solid waste management of priority local authorities in other than
Western Province are described in the table below.
Table 6-21: Category and Issues of Solid Waste Management of priority local
authorities in other than Western Province
No. Province Local Discharge, collection, disposal Intermediated 3Rs
Authority transportation treatment
1 Uva Kataraga Waste collection service rate There are three disposal Barrel for the None.
ma PS is as low as 65.7% and one sites which become open collection of organic
fourth of waste generation dumping, waste scattering waste taken to the
amount is self-disposed. and leachate leaking and compost plant is not
Large annual fluctuation of this causes a serious distributed.
waste generation amount. environmental issues
Good Not good Not good Not good
2 North Thamank Waste collection service does Disposal site causes The compost plant Valuable
Central aduwa not run on schedule serious environmental owned by PS was material is not
PS Waste collection service rate impacts to the started operation separated
is as low as 18%. surrounding areas again since 2015. properly.
Wild elephants scavenge Separated valuable
the disposed waste & waste includes much
disturb the operations of residue and it is
the disposal site. requires some more
Category A
sorting by workers.
Not good Not good Good Not good
3 Northe Jaffna Collection rate is 75.7%, the The disposed waste is The garden compost Although
rn MC waste collection service does scattered and expanded. plant and MRF are promotion of
not run on schedule due to There is no orderly not functioning 3Rs is carried
malfunction of old collection function of design of new properly due to lack out, the activity
vehicles land fill site. of technology and is insufficient
Some surrounding LAs management.
have issues with the
landfill site.
4 Eastern Trincoma Although the waste Open dumping causes None No activity of
lee UC collection rate is 62.9%, the environmental issues to the 3Rs is carried
waste collection service does surrounding area out.
not run on schedule due to Wild elephants scavenge
malfunction of old collection the disposed waste &
vehicles disrupt the operation of the
disposal site
5 North- Kurunega Although the waste Although the disposed The existing Organic waste
Wester la MC collection rate is 80.4%, the waste is regularly moved compost plant is not for the compost
n waste collection service does by heavy machinery, the functioning properly plant is
not run on schedule due to covering soil is not due to lack of separated at
malfunction of old collection properly carried out and technology and generation
vehicles. this causes environmental management source in some
issues to the surrounding areas,, however
area. the amount of
separated
Category B
organic waste is
not enough
Excellent Good Not good Not good
6 Central Nuwara Although the waste The leachate treatment Not yet managed, Not yet
Eliya MC collection rate is 78.2%, the facility seems to be however the managed,
absence of waste collection malfunctioning and might material recovery however the
workers sometimes causes cause water pollution facility will be material
the delays or disruptions of downstream. established from recovery facility
the collection duty 2016. will be
There is a lot of waste established
scattered at stationed from 2016.
collection points
Excellent Good Not good Not good
261
6.3.2 Improvement of SWM at local authorities in other than Western Province
The local authorities belonging to category A are required to carry out a) optimization of
SWM, b) introducing of intermediated treatment and c) promotion of 3Rs, while the category
B are mainly required to carry out b) introducing of intermediated treatment and c) promotion
of 3Rs.
a. Improvement of SWM at local authorities beglonging to category A

The following improvements are required at the local authorities beglonging to category A
to solve the sanitary issue caused by improper discharge and collection of waste.
a.1 Optimization of SWM

(1)Storage/discharge
• Dissemination of proper self-disposal method,
• Establishment and dissemination of proper discharge rule
(2)Collection/transfer:
• Improvement of collection and transter rute
• Enhancement of capacity of maintenance for collection vehicles and so on.
(3)Disposal of waste:
• Improvement of existing disposal site with experience of the results of SATREPS/
improvement and application of leachate treatment facility at Nuwara Eliya
• establishment of management system of new sanitary landfill site
(4)Data base system of solid waste managment
• Formulation of quantatib solid waste management system
(5)Optimization of SWM finance system
(6) Formulation of Solid Waste Management Master Plan and optimization of by-law
b. Improvement of SWM at local authorities beglonging to category A and

category B
The following improvements are required at local authorities beglonging to category A and
category B to expand the lifetime of disposal site, solve the environmental issue and
promotion of material recovery.
b.1 Introducing of intermediated treatment

(1) Establishment of proper intermediate treatment facility
• Treatment of organic waste : optimaization of existing / new compost plant facility
• Material recover : Optimization of existing / new MRF
b.2 Promotion of 3Rs

(1)3Rs activity at generation source
• Distribution of home compost barrel and instruction of proper useage of it by manual
• Supporting the current waste separation activity of loal authority
(2)Introducing the community based collection system of valuable material
• Studying the sustainability of introduce of Japanese community based collection
sysytem
(3)Introducing and dissemination of the separation and collection of waste
262
6.4 Financial System

6.4.1 Public Financial System in Sri Lanka
In accordance with the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka of 1987, the
Provincial System was introduced, and a part of the political, administrative and financial
powers the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) were implementing was devolved to the nine
provinces established based on the amendment to the Constitution.
The contents of powers for national and subnational levels were indicated in the 9th schedule
of the 13th Amendment with its three lists for the roles and functions to remain with the
GOSL and those to be devolved to the provincial councils and implemented concurrently by
the two. The amendment also indicated financial sources for the provinces.
In relation to the implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and the
decentralization above, the Finance Commission (FC) was established as an independent
organization for accomplishing reforms in the public financial system, implementing
balanced apportionment of financial resources among provinces and local authorities and
improving efficiency of government expenditures.
Under the new system, the FC identifies financial needs of the provinces, prepares an
apportionment proposal and negotiates with the GOSL and the provincial councils on
proposed allocations before transferring financial resources from the national to the
subnational level. Based on the apportionment proposal of the FC, the General Treasury
transfers allocated funds to the provinces. Part of the allocation is transferred to local
authorities (LA) by respective provincial councils.
This section examines the public financial system of Sri Lanka by introducing the financial
autonomy of and own-sources devolved to the provinces and local authorities under the 13th
Amendment to the Constitution, government grants and fund allocation to the subnational
levels based on the information obtained during the 2nd field survey.
a. Decentralization
As mentioned above, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution divides roles and functions of
governance to the national and subnational levels with the three lists. The contents of the lists
are presented in the table below.
Table 6-22: Lists of Roles and Functions for National and Subnational Governments
Provincial List (Provincial
Concurrent List Reserved List (Central Government)
Councils)
No (List-1) (List-2) (List-3)
Planning and implementation National policy on all subjects and
1 Planning
of provincial economic plans functions
2 Education Higher education Defense and national security
3 Local government National housing and construction Foreign affairs
Acquisition and requisitioning of
4 Housing and construction Posts and telecommunications
property
Finance in relation to national revenue,
5 Roads Social services and rehabilitation monetary policy and external
resources; customs
Social services and Foreign trade; inter-province trade and
6 Agricultural and agrarian services
rehabilitation commerce
Agriculture and agrarian
7 Health Ports and harbors
services
8 Rural development Co-operatives Aviation and airports
Health and indigenous
9 Irrigation National transport
medicine
River and waterways; shipping and
10 Land Fisheries
navigation
11 Irrigation Employment Minerals and mines
Immigration, emigration, and
12 Probation and child care Tourism
citizenship
263
Provincial List (Provincial

Concurrent List Reserved List (Central Government)
Councils)
No (List-1) (List-2) (List-3)
Elections including presidential,
13 Livestock Trade and commerce parliamentary, provincial councils and
local authorities
14 Transport Price control Census and statistics
15 Drug and poisons Professional occupations and training
National archives; archeological
activities and sites and antiques
16 Protection of the environment
declared by or under any law made by
Parliament to be of national importance
All other subjects and functions not
17 specified in the provincial council list
and the concurrent list
Within the territories of the Provincial List, the provincial councils are authorized to
formulate and implement by-laws and regulations. At the same time, the list also contains the
sources of revenue to finance the expenditures of the devolved functions of the provincial
councils.
On the other hand, local authorities – Municipal Councils, Urban Councils and Pradeshiya
Sabhas42 – implement the following functions under supervision of the provincial councils.
Table 6-23: Roles and Functions of Local Authorities
Municipal and Urban Councils Pradeshiya Sabha
Maintenance and cleaning all public streets and open Providing services related with public health, public
1 spaces vested in the councils or committed to their utilities and public thoroughfares.
management
Enforcing the proper maintenance, cleanliness and Protection and promotion of the comfort, convenience
2
repairs of all private streets and welfare of the public.
Supervising growth and development of their area of Provision of all amenities within their area.
jurisdiction by planning and widening streets,
3
Reservation of open spaces, and Execution of public
improvements
4 Abating all nuisances
Establishing and maintaining (subject to the extent of
its resources) any public utility services which are
5 authorized to be maintained under LA Ordinances and
required for welfare, comfort and convenience of the
public
Promoting public health, welfare and convenience,
6 and developing sanitation and amenities in the council
areas.
Departments of Local Government in Provincial Councils supervise activities of local authorities.

However, human resource affairs of local authorities are supervised by the Provincial Public
Service Commissions that belong directly to Provincial Governors.
The legislations of local authorities (Municipal Council Ordinance, Urban Council Ordinance and
Pradeshiya Sabha Act) allow any local authority to establish a local authority fund to finance its
needs. The fund empowers local authorities to initiate revenue generation activities according to
their needs. Local authorities are authorized to change public service charges and set unit rates for
public utilities, fees and local taxes.
b. Finances of Provincial Councils and Local Authorities
b.1 Revenues of Provincial Councils and Local Authorities

The revenues of provincial councils and local authorities consists of (1) Own-source revenues
formed by local taxes, service charges and public service fees imposed and set by the
42
There were 23 Municipal Councils, 41 Urban Councils and 271 Pradeshiya Sabhas in Sri Lanka as of the end of 2013.
264
provinces and the local authorities, and rents or revenues of public facilities; (2) Government
grants and (3) Other funds such as loans, donations and assistance obtained from other
external sources.
Detailed information about each of the sources is as follows.
b.1.1 Own-source Revenues

The own-source revenues of provincial councils and local authorities are indicated by the
Constitution and legislation of local authorities (Municipal and Urban Council Ordinances
and Pradeshiya Sabha Act) as mentioned earlier.
According to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka, the own-source revenues
of provincial councils consist of 20 types of sources such as local taxes, license fees and
service charges. As for local authorities, the own-source revenues can be categorized into six
categories to be formed from local taxes, fees, service charges and property rents.
The detailed list is presented in the table below.
Table 6-24: Own-source Revenues of Provincial Councils and Local Authorities
No Provincial Councils No Local Authorities
Turnover taxes on wholesale and retail sales within
1 such limits and subject to such exemptions as by law 1 Local taxes
made by Parliament
Betting taxes and taxes on prize competitions and
2 lotteries other than national lotteries and lotteries  Property tax
organized by the Government of Sri Lanka
License taxes, arrack, toddy rents, tapping license fees
3  Motor vehicle tax
and liquor license fees
Motor vehicle license fees within such limits and
4 subject to such exemptions as may be prescribed by  Trade tax
law made by Parliament
5 Dealership license taxes on drugs and other chemicals  Event tax
Stamp duties on transfer of properties such as lands and
6 2 Fines and penalties
motor cars
7 Fees imposed by courts  Fines on traffic rule violations
8 Fees charged under the Medical Ordinance 3 Service fees
9 Fees charged under the Motor Traffic Act  Land registration fee
Department fees in respect of any of the matters
10  Registration and certificate fees
specified in this list
11 Fees under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance  Business license fees
Fees on lands alienated under the Land Development
12  Fees for construction permit
Ordinance and Crown Lands Ordinance
Court fees including stamp fees on documents
13 4 Rents and revenues of public facilities
produced in court
Regulatory charges under Weights and Measures
14  Rents on markets
Ordinance
Land revenue including assessment and collection of
15 revenue and survey and maintenance of land records  Rent of public facilities
for revenue purposes
Taxes on land and buildings including the property of
16 the state to the extent permitted by law made by  Parking fees
Parliament
Taxes on mineral rights within such limits and subject
 Revenues of workshops and other local
17 to such exemptions as may be prescribed by law made
properties
by Parliament
Licensing fees on the possession, transport, purchase
18 5 Public Service Charges
and sale of intoxicating liquors
Other taxation within the province in order to raise
19 revenue for Provincial purposes to the extent permitted  Waste collection fee
by or under a law made by Parliament
20 Others  Water fee
6 Others
265
In addition to the above, stamp duties and court fines are included in the own sources of the
local authorities. All revenues except the stamp duties and court fines are collected by
relevant departments and organizations of provincial councils and local authorities. As for the
stamp duties and the court fines, collection rights lay with the Land Registration Agency of
the central government and the court office. Therefore, these organizations are obliged to
transfer the relevant part of the collected stamp duties and court fines to each provincial
council. The provincial councils, in turn, transfer a certain amount of these assigned revenues
to their local authorities based on invoices submitted by the local authorities.
In the table below, the most important revenues of local authorities are listed. The revenues
are picked from the own-sources of some of the target municipalities of this study. In each of
the selected municipalities, the top five types, in terms of their shares in the total amount of
own-source revenues, were selected.
Table 6-25: Major Own-source Revenues of Local Authorities
Katunayake Katharagama
Major Types of Own-source Dehiwala MC Moratuwa MC Kesbewa UC
No Seeduwa UC PS
Revenues
Share Rank Share Rank Share Rank Share Rank Share Rank
1 Property tax 41.6% 1 33.9% 2 14.5% 2 59.7% 1 6.0% 4
2 Stamp fees on land sales 34.7% 2 39.9% 1 65.1% 1 12.2% 2
3 Court fines 4.3% 3 3.6% 3 6.4% 3
4 Interest on fixed deposits 2.9% 4 1.9% 5
5 Trade tax 1.8% 5 2.7% 5
6 Waste collection fee 3.2% 4
Rent of markets and trade
7 3.3% 4 7.4% 4
centers
8 Land permission fees 3.6% 3 29.7% 1
9 Land tax 1.8% 5
10 Water fees 7.5% 3
11 Parking fees 18.4% 2
12 Public advertising fees 5.5% 5
Although the major sources of revenues differ across local authorities, in most cases the most
important types of own-source revenues are usually those included in the table above.
b.1.2 Grants
The GOSL allocates three types of grants to the provinces and local authorities; (1) Block
Grants for financing recurrent expenditures, (2) Capital Grants for financing capital
expenditures and (3) Other subsidies.
Block Grant (BG) is released to finance the recurrent needs of provincial councils and local
authorities such as personnel emoluments (salaries, wages, overtime and other allowances),
supplies, maintenance of fixed assets and utilities. The personnel emoluments in the BG are
paid only to the permanent staff approved by the Department of Management Service, the
Ministry of Finance. The remaining part of the grant, designated for financing other recurrent
expenditures, is estimated based on the difference between the actual needs of the provinces
and the own source revenues expected to be utilized for the same purpose. This grant is
transferred to provincial councils in bulk amounts and the provincial councils are obliged to
transfer relevant parts of the grant to their local authorities.
The amounts of the BG released to the provinces from 2010 to 2013 are summarized in the
table below (transfers to local authorities are included)
266
Table 6-26: Amounts of Block Grant Released from 2010 to 2013 (Unit: million LKR)
No Category 2010 2011 2012 2013
1 Allocated Amount by Treasury 85,000 90,000 94,877 102,800
2 Actually Released Amount* 85,299 94,602 91,552 108,801
3 Released Amount / Allocation 100.4% 105.1% 96.5% 105.8%
*-Additional appropriations are included.
Source: Finance Commission, 2014, “Annual Report-2013”
On the other hand, the Capital Grant is released for financing the capital expenditures and
classified into the Criteria-based Grant (CBG) and the Provincial Specific Development
Grant (PSDG).
The CBG is a type of capital grant designated for reduction of regional disparities; and
therefore, must be spent on developmental activities to improve the socio-economic status of
residents. In relation to allocation and utilization of this grant, provincial councils are
required to adhere to relevant guidelines issued by the Finance Commission.
The PSDG provides financing for the capital expenditures of provincial councils and local
authorities and is classified into three categories; (1) Sectorial allocation for financing
infrastructure development projects in the provinces, (2) Funds of special projects for
balanced regional development and (3) Funds of foreign and locally-financed projects
designed by and agreed on at the national level. Detailed information about each of the
category is as follows:
 The funds released under the sectorial allocation are decided for each of the target
sectors; and thus, the provincial councils are not allowed to spend the amount in other
sectors or for other purposes. The target sectors are (1) economic infrastructures
(segments are roads and transport), (2) Social infrastructure and services (segments
are education, Health including SWM in local authorities, probation and child care
and social services) and (3) production sector (segments are agricultural development,
rural development and tourism).
 Funds of special project for balanced regional development are the funds for projects
formulated for achieving the government objectives set for balanced regional
development. These projects are usually implemented for one to three years.
 Designated funds for implementing foreign and locally-financed projects are also part
of the PSDG.
The PSDG is only released to provincial councils. However, the provincial councils either
transfer parts of the grant to local authorities in relation to the projects being implemented in
their territories or their own expenditures on behalf of the local authorities.
There are also occasions that a flexible allocation is included in the PSDG, considering the
possibility of insufficient funds for financing all the target expenditures.
The amounts of the PSDG released to the provinces from 2010 to 2013 are summarized in the
table below.
Table 6-27: Amounts of PSDG Released from 2010 to 2013 (Unit: million LKR)
No Category 2010 2011 2012 2013
1 Treasury Allocations for Capital Grants:
For CBG 3,075 4,460 3,025 2,390
For PSDG 19,480 23,457 24,714 24,564
Total Allocation 22,555 27,917 27,739 26,954
2 Actual Released Grants:
Released CBG 2,612 3,855 2,859 2,264
Released PSDG 16,404 11,199 6,961 7,773
Total Released Grants 19,016 15,054 9,820 10,037
3 Released Amount / Allocation 84.3% 53.9% 35.4% 37.2%
267
The other subsidies are divided into following four major categories:
 Revenues to be allocated to provincial councils instead of Business Turnover Tax
(BTT). The BTT was abolished in 2011. As the tax was the major own-source
revenue for provincial councils, the GOSL started sharing part of the government
revenues formed from the collection of the Nation Building Tax (NBT), Motor vehicle
registration fees and Stamp duties. The amounts to be allocated to the provinces are
70% of total NBT revenues, 33% of collected motor vehicle registration fees and 70%
of the collected stamp duties. The fund is allocated to provincial councils based on
their socio-economic conditions and needs.
 Subsidies to lagging local authorities. Local authorities with own-source revenues
less than 10 million LKR are considered as lagging local authorities and all of them
are Pradeshiya Sabhas. The GOSL subsidizes these local authorities under a special
support system for lagging local authorities. In 2014, the central government released
1.4 billion LKR to 245 Pradeshiya Sabhas. Local authorities that meet the condition
must apply for the subsidy through the Ministry of Local Governments and Provincial
Councils.
 Fund of decentralized budget. The Ministry of Finance allocates a certain amount of
funds to parliament members for financing development activities in their elected
local authorities. This fund is considered a decentralized budget and transferred to
local authorities through the District Secretariats.
 Projects funds by line-ministries. The funds that are used as expenditures for
projects that line-ministries implement in territories of local authorities are also
considered a part of grant(s).
b.1.3 Other Funds

Other funds include financial resources procured by or provided to provincial councils and
local authorities such as loans, contributions, donation and assistance.
As for local authorities, the most commonly used external source was the low-interest loan of
the Local Loan and Development Fund (LLDF), a foundation under the Ministry of Local
Governments and Provincial Councils.
b.2 Expenditures of Provincial Councils and Local Authorities

Expenditures of provincial councils and local authorities are categorized into Recurrent and
Capital Expenditures. Detailed information about each category is as follows.
b.2.1 Recurrent Expenditures

According to the Annual Report-2013 by the Finance Commission, recurrent expenditures
accounted for 70 to 80% of the total expenditures of provincial councils and local authorities.
The majority (70 to 80%) of the recurrent expenditures were personnel emoluments (salaries
and allowances). The other recurrent expenditures such as O & M expenses of fixed assets,
office supplies, communication costs and utilities expenses occupied 20 to 30%.
The recurrent expenditures of provinces and local authorities from 2010 to 2013 were
268
Table 6-28: Recurrent Expenditures of Provinces and LAs (Unit: million LKR)
No Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013
A Personnel Emoluments:
1 Salaries and Wages 66,481 71,753 68,660 71,143
2 Overtime and Holiday Pay 4,134 4,652 4,999 6,761
3 Other Allowance 21,434 24,535 33,092 39,416
Total Personnel Emoluments 92,049 100,940 106,751 117,320
B Other Recurrent Expenditures:
4 Travelling 1,022 1,125 1,187 1,245
5 Supplies 2,879 3,683 3,600 4,070
6 Maintenance 3,224 3,778 3,958 4,303
7 Contractual Services 2,457 2,855 3,133 3,440
8 Transfers 11,762 12,240 13,441 12,935
9 Grants 4,739 4,314 5,833 11,051
10 Subsidies 175 690 983 67
11 Other Expenditures 609 730 495 1,096
Total Other Recurrent Expenditures 26,869 29,416 32,631 38,208
C Total Recurrent Expenditures 118,918 130,356 139,381 155,528
D Ratios:
Share of Personnel Emoluments 77.4% 77.4% 76.6% 75.4%
Share of Other Recurrent Expenditures 22.6% 22.6% 23.4% 24.6%
The comparison of the recurrent expenditures and the amount of released block grants to the
provinces (local authorities are included) is presented in the table below.
Table 6-29: Recurrent Expenditures and Block Grant (Unit: million LKR)
No Category 2010 2011 2012 2013
Recommended Amount by Finance Commission for
1 85,000 90,000 94,877 102,800
Block Grants
2 Allocated Amount by Treasury 85,000 90,000 94,877 102,800
3 Actually Released Amount* 85,299 94,602 91,552 108,801
4 Actual Recurrent Expenditures 118,918 130,356 139,381 155,528
Financed from Block Grants 71.7% 72.6% 65.7% 70.0%
Financed from own-sources 28.3% 27.4% 34.3% 30.0%
*-Additional appropriations are included.
According to the tables, the amount of recurrent expenditures increased continuously and
more than 75% of the annual recurrent expenditures were personnel emoluments. On the
other hand, the amount of block grants released to the provinces each year accounts for
around 70% of the total recurrent expenditures on average. Therefore, it can be concluded
that the block grants cover only personnel emoluments among the recurrent expenditures.
However, it should be considered that the part in the block grant that corresponds to
personnel emoluments targets only those for permanent staff approved by the Department of
Management Service, the Ministry of Finance.
All expenses related with the contract-based staff and other recurrent expenditures are being
financed from own-source revenues of provincial councils and local authorities.
b.2.2 Capital Expenditures

Capital expenditures are expenditures related with the extension of existing assets (including
fixed assets and infrastructure facilities) or creation of new assets in order to achieve
socio-economic development. In Sri Lanka, expenditures on human resource development are
also considered as part of capital expenditures.
269
Amounts of capital expenditures of the provinces and the capital grants released by the
central government from 2010 to 2013 are compared in the table below.
Table 6-30: Capital Expenditures of Provinces and Released Capital Grants (Unit:
million LKR)
No Category 2010 2011 2012 2013
1 Treasury Allocations for Capital Grants:
For CBG 3,075 4,460 3,025 2,390
For PSDG 19,480 23,457 24,714 24,564
Total Allocation 22,555 27,917 27,739 26,954
2 Actual Released Grants:
Released CBG 2,612 3,855 2,859 2,264
Released PSDG 16,404 11,199 6,961 7,773
Total Released Grants 19,016 15,054 9,820 10,037
3 Actual Capital Expenditures:
Expenditures in PSDG target sectors 16,830 12,493 11,351 13,578
Expenditures in other sectors 7,744 6,902 10,045 8,130
Total Expenditures 24,574 19,395 21,396 21,708
4 Ratios:
Released Grants/Allocation 84.3% 53.9% 35.4% 37.2%
Released Grants/Expenditures 77.4% 77.6% 45.9% 46.2%
As the table shows, the annual allocation of the grants was more than 22.5 billion LKR and
the amount was maintained at a level of 27 billion for the latest three years. However, the
actual released grants decreased annually and the amount was less than 50% of the allocated
amounts for the latest two years.
For two years (2012 and 2013), only 45% of the total capital expenditures of the provinces
were covered by the government grants and the remaining parts were financed from the own
funds of the provinces.
c. Grant Allocation and Transfer
c.1 Allocation of Grants

Although the Ministry of Finance announces the total amount of grants to be released to
provinces and local authorities, apportionment of the funds is made by the Finance
Commission.
According to the Finance Commission, the structure of the Block Grant is as follows: 80% of
funds are for personnel emoluments and 20% of funds are for other recurrent expenditures.
The needs of provinces and local authorities for personnel emoluments are determined based
on the number of permanent staff approved by the Department of Management Service of the
Ministry of Finance. Based on the results, the funds for other recurrent expenditures are
estimated.
The Commission identifies provincial needs for capital grants by comparing Annual
Development Action Plans (to be prepared under Provincial Midterm Development Plans)
and budget proposals submitted by the provinces with the Midterm Agency Results
Framework that was formulated for respective provinces based on the National Development
Policy Framework and the National Midterm Development Plan. At this stage, the Finance
Commission prepares an apportionment proposal considering the socio-economic conditions
of each province such as population, poverty and potential of own-source revenues. In
addition, the commission also considers the sustainability of projects implemented in the
provinces and the efficiency or effectiveness of the project expenditures. After preparation of
270
the apportionment proposal, the commission informs the provinces about the results, starts
negotiations and submits the results to the Ministry of Finance as a recommendation.
Provincial councils are obliged to revise their budget proposals based on the
recommendations and resubmit them to the commission for its approval. The Ministry of
Finance releases grants based on the provincial budgets approved by the Finance
Commission.
c.2 Transfer of Grants

The Ministry of Finance transfers all types of grants to the Ministry of Local Government and
Provincial Councils (MLGPC) as a bulk amount. The Accounting Department of the MLGPC
allocates the amount to each province based on the apportionment and releases this
apportioned amount to the Chief Secretary Office of each Provincial Council.
As for the grants earmarked to local authorities, Provincial Treasury Departments transfer the
grants through the Departments of Local Governments (DLG). The DLG is a department
established within the Local Government Ministry of each provincial council. It coordinates
between local authorities and the central government/the provincial council, supervises
activities of local governments and verifies their financial conditions and accounting
processes. All grants to local authorities, except the funds under decentralized budget, are
transferred through the DLG.
d. SWM Finance
SWM activities are financed by own-source revenues of local authorities. According to the
results of the 2nd field survey, SWM expenses accounted for 10 to 30% of total expenditures
of local authorities; and thus, waste collection service is one of the major public services in
the local authorities.
However, the amount of revenues collected by waste fees did not even reach 10% of the total
SWM expenses in all of the local authorities targeted during the field survey. The main
reason for the low collection rate is that the local authorities conduct waste collection services
to all households and businesses in their territories, but collect waste fees only from
large-scale businesses.
The table below shows relevant data provided by some of the target municipalities.
Table 6-31: SWM Finance in Some Local Authorities (Unit: Thous.LKR)
Dehiwala Moratu Kesbewa Katunayake
No Types of Expenditures
MC wa MC UC Seeduwa UC
1 Total Municipal Expenditures 1,221,134 465,243 391,552 140,402
2 SWM Expenditures 281,334 151,508 41,163 40,934
3 Collected Waste Fees 14,883 8,511 3,043 1,692
4 Ratios:
SWM Expenditures / Total Expenditures 23.0% 32.6% 10.5% 29.2%
Collected Fees / SWM Expenditures 5.3% 5.6% 7.4% 4.1%
On the other hand, one of the priority sectors for PSDG is the health sector, which includes
SWM in local authorities. According to the National Solid Waste Management Support
Center (NSWMSC) of the MLGPC, the central government allocated 90 million LKR under
PSDG in 2015 for improvement of SWM in local authorities. As of the end of October 2015,
around 75% of the allocated grant was already spent for technical assistance such as training
and procurement of tools and equipment for the local authorities.
At the same time, the Waste Management Authority (WMA) of the Western Province has
been implementing technical and physical assistance on improvement of SWM in local
authorities of the province by means of organizing training for SWM staff and provision of
271
tools and equipment. These activities of the WMA are financed from the central government
grant provided under PSDG to the province. The annual budget is usually up to 100 million
LKR, according to the WMA.
However, the Finance Commission emphasized less priority for allocation of grants to
investments in the SWM sector based on the reason that the sector does not have a direct
impact on national development,
6.4.2 Possibilities of Financing SWM Improvement Projects
a. Possibility of Investments by Local Authorities

The most commonly used external source for local authorities to finance their investment
needs is the low-interest loan by the Local Loan and Development Fund (LLDF) supervised
by the Ministry of Local Governments and Provincial Councils.
If SWM improvement projects have to be financed by local authorities, there is a high

possibility that the local authorities will apply for the LLDF loans.
a.1 Summary of LLDF

The LLDF is a public financial organization that belongs to the Ministry of Local
Governments and Provincial Councils. It was established by the Ministry of Finance in order
to support local authorities to finance their financial needs for infrastructure development.
The LLDF commenced its operation with the long-term loans provided by the Ministry of
Finance and later received project funds (both grant(s) and soft loan(s)) from the Asia
Development Fund (ADB) and the World Bank (WB). As the Ministry of Finance stopped
financing the LLDF in 2008, the organization has been financing its operational expenses
from the earnings generated from the loan interests, fixed deposits and government bonds.
According to the balance sheet of the LLDF, the total assets in 2013 were 7.3 billion LKR.
The current assets accounted for only 6.7% of the total assets (Cash and cash
equivalents-2.5%, short term interest receivables-4.2%) and the rest was non-current assets
(fixed assets-0.5%, bonds held to maturity-40% and long term loan receivables-59.5%). The
majority of the assets (94%) were procured from long term loans (loans from the Ministry of
Finance and project funds of other donor organizations) and 4% was short term payables
(interest payments to the creditors for the loans provided).
As the income statement shows, the amount of total revenues in 2013 was 335 million LKR
while that of the total expenditures was 329 million LKR. The net earnings after tax for the
year were estimated at 5.6 million LKR.
The LLDF is a foundation that releases development loans only to public organizations
(including local authorities). In accordance with the Local Loan and Development Ordinance
and the Local Loan and Development (Amendment) Act of 1993, the LLDF releases low
interest loans for 12 types of projects which are implemented by local authorities. The
interest rates are stable and much lower in comparison with those of commercial banks.
According to the LLDF, the interest rates have not been changed for eight years (from 2006
to August 2014). The current rates are compiled in the table below.
272
Table 6-32: Annual Interest Rates of LLDF Loans

Loan
No Project Types
Rates
1 SWM 5.5%
2 Development of Eco-tourism 9.0%
3 Improvement of Weekly Fair 6.5%
4 Water Supply and Sewerage 7.0%
5 Construction of Libraries 7.0%
6 Construction of Crematorium 6.5%
7 Purchase of Equipment designated for Road Maintenance and 9.0%
Sanitation (Waste Collection)
8 Construction of Office Building 7.0%
9 Construction of Market Complex 9.0%
10 Development of Rural Road 6.0%
11 Other Revenue Generating Projects 9.0%
a.2 Current Conditions of Loan Utilization

The number of loans released by the LLDF for the past 10 years is as follows.
Number of Disbursed Loans

160
135
140
120
100
80 60
60
30 30 29 32 35
40 22 17 15
20
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Figure 6-3: Number of Loans Released by LLDF

According to the figure, the LLDF released loans 30 times a year on average (not including
loans released in 2007).
The information of loans released to local authorities is shown in the table below.
Table 6-33: Information of Loans Released to Local Authorities
Province No of Projects Loan Amount (LKR) Share

Central 46 219,484,800 8.9%
Northcentral 13 188,069,000 7.7%
Northwestern 53 504,977,500 20.6%
Sabamagamuwa 32 233,300,000 9.5%
Southern 50 327,410,000 13.3%
Uva 20 127,690,000 5.2%
Western 59 702,774,800 28.6%
Eastern 14 95,420,000 3.9%
Northern 7 57,000,000 2.3%
Total 294 2,456,126,100 100.0%
Average: Loan per Project 8,354,170
273
According to the table, the LLDF released loans to 30 projects implemented by local
authorities in a year. The total amount of loans released to local authorities for the 10 years
reached to 2.5 billion LKR and half of the amount was received by local authorities of
Western and North-western Provinces (28.6% and 20.6% of the total amount, respectively).
The average amount per project was estimated as 8.4 million LKR.
The amount of loans received by local authorities for the past 10 years were compiled by
their purposes (by types of projects) and reflected in the following figure.
1% 1% 0% Loan by Purposes (10 years)

2% Purchase of vehicles and machineries
5%
Construction of weekly fairs,
2% 10% economic centers and public markets
39% Improvement of public utilities
Construction of crematorium
Road development
40% Improvement of SWM
Construction and renovation of office

buildings
Figure 6-4: Loans Compiled by Project Types (Total=2.5 Billion LKR)

According to the figure, 80% of the total loans released to local authorities were used for
construction of markets/trade centres and procurement of vehicles and machinery.
Expenditures for improvement of SWM occupy only 1% of the grand total.
a.3 Considerations
According to the information provided by the LLDF, the loan recovery rate is around 70%.
As for the target local authorities of this study, 7 out of 10 local authorities have received
loans from the LLDF. Only three local authorities – the Katharagama PS, the Trincomalee
UC and the Moratuwa MC – have never received a loan from the foundation.
The total loans received by the seven local authorities were 640 million LKR and 40% were
already repaid and the amount of arrears accounted for only 0.1% (640,352 LKR). Based on
this result, the repayment rate of the LLDF loans was considered sufficient.
Table 6-34: Loan Repayment Conditions by seven Target Local Authorities (Unit:
LKR)
Amount within
Released Total Repaid Loan Arrears
Schedule
1 638,340,292 241,934,366 688,352 395,717,574
2 100% 37.9% 0.1% 62.0%
According to the information obtained during the 2nd field survey, the major external source for
local authorities to finance their investments is the LLDF. As the loan repayment rate was
relatively high, it can be assumed that the LLDF is in relatively good financial condition.
However, judging from its financial statements of 2013, the amount of working capital accounts
for 2.7% of its total assets (current assets-6.7% and current liabilities-4%) and is equal to only 190
million LKR (total assets-7.3 billion; share of working capital-2.7%). It is believed that the small
amount of working capital had resulted from the longer periods set for the loans released to local
authorities.
274
Therefore, there is a high possibility that the LLDF loans cover only small-scale projects such as
procurement of tools and equipment that can be repaid in shorter periods. However, the amount of
funds available for release changes depending on actual implementation of loan repayment
schedules by the LLDF in the future.
In addition to the above, the LLDF examines the sustainability of individual projects and financial
capabilities of local authorities when evaluating loan applications. Therefore, local authorities that
receive loans from the fund might be limited to those with sufficient own-source revenues and
higher financial capabilities.
b. Possibility of Investing from Government Grant

According to the results of the 2nd field survey, most of the local authorities are struggling to
finance their daily activities. Since local authorities are unable to improve the quality of public
services to a sufficient level due to their limited financial capabilities, the government grant is
essential for improving regional and local SWM capacities.
b.1 Possibility of Grant Allocation

From the fact that SWM is included in the target sectors of the PSDG, it is possible that the GOSL
will release grants for SWM projects under the PSDG in the future. However, the Finance
Commission, the key organization for approval of provincial budgets and apportionment of grants,
has been considering that the costs of these projects should be financed by user local authorities.
Therefore, it might be necessary to reconfirm the priority of SWM in the national development
policies and to amend relevant contents of the Midterm Development Plan of Sri Lanka in order
to ensure sufficient allocation of grants for the SWM sector.
b.2 Target Projects for Grants and Local Own-sources

The government grant should be utilized for financing projects that provinces and local authorities
cannot afford from their own funds such as extensive replacement of collection vehicles,
expansion of existing SWM facilities or improvement of their processing capacities and
construction of regional-level landfill sites and intermediate treatment facilities. However, the
operation and maintenance costs of such equipment and facilities should be financed by user local
authorities.
Funds required for small-scale projects in local authorities such as expansion of existing local
facilities, construction of new local facilities and procurement of instruments will be affordable
for local authorities. For these projects, local authorities can also utilize the low interest loan of
the LLDF.
b.3 Considerations
If all expenses of SWM improvement projects are financed by domestic sources, extensive SWM
improvements might not be implemented due to possible limitations of funds.
In addition, local authorities that will be able to receive loan(s) from the LLDF will also be
limited due to low financial capacities. It will be necessary to promote participation of
low-income local authorities by such means as lowering interest rates using part of the grants.
c. Possibility of External Sources (Soft Loan)

In order to implement extensive improvements in the SWM sector, it is necessary to involve
external funds. Utilization of foreign soft loans was considered as follows.
c.1 Roles of the Central Government and Local Authorities

Considering the financial situation of local authorities, government participation is necessary
when repaying the principal amount of the soft loan with its interest. In relation to the repayment,
the central government should bear the following expenses; (1) full amount of interest expenses,
(2) amounts used for investments in regional-level facilities such as construction or expansion of
275
regional landfill sites and ITFs and (3) full amount of project operation costs.
In this case, repayment of funds invested in small-scale local projects for construction of local
facilities and procurement of equipment (without interest) and O&M expenses for all facilities and
equipment to be constructed or procured during the project could be financed through revenues
from tipping fees and waste collection fees collected by relevant local authorities.
c.2 Project Organization

It is possible to form a project implementation organization (PIO) based on the NSWMSC of the
MLGPC with participation of provincial councils. In this case, regional large-scale projects will
be implemented by the PIO directly. As for local small-scale projects, the PIO will conduct
technical support to local authorities on implementation of the projects. Financing these local
projects will be conducted through the LLDF with participation of the PIO.
In this case, part of the loan fund should be managed by the LLDF and released to local
authorities. The LLDF will undertake releasing of loans and loan contract management.
The LLDF possesses sufficient experience in implementing loan components of donor funded
projects. Currently, the foundation has been implementing loan components of the Urban
Development and Low Income Housing Project (UDLIHP) of the ADB, the Local Government
Infrastructure Improvement Project (LGIIP) and the Perennial Crop Development Project
(PCDP).
d. Items to Consider
One of the top priorities in the SWM sector of Sri Lanka is improvement of the SWM financial
system. Due to lack of enough budget of SWM, the serious issues of SWM have happned such as
poor operation of final disposal site, the adverse environmental and wilf life impact at disposal
site caused by inadequate anti-wild elephant’s countermeasure at some local authorities.
SWM activities are implemented mainly by local authorities and relevant expenses are paid from
their own funds. The local authorities focus on the balance of total revenues and expenditures
only, and do not pay sufficient attention to sustainability of individual activities such as waste
collection service(s). Although the local authorities conduct waste collection services to all
households and businesses in their territories, the waste collection fees is charged from large-scale
businesses only. Furthermore, the rule of charging system of waste collection fee is not clear
among local authorities. This results in a low waste collection rate and insufficient operation of
local landfill sites in low-income local authorities such as the Katharagama PS.
The pre-requisite conditions for the effectiveness of any SWM improvement project will be the
sustainability of waste collection service and SWM activities that can be achieved by (1)
improving service efficiency or reducing operational costs and (2) reforming the current waste
collection fee system to charge fee from not only large scale business but also middle ans small
scale business. Regarding on the charging the waste collection fee to residents, the possibility of it
should be studied and discussed among stakholders well because there many difficulties such as
collection system, making consensus of residents and so on.
276
6.5 Improvement of SWM
6.5.1 Schedule of improvement of SWM in short term and mid term

The schedule of improvement of SWM in the short-term and mid-term to solve the issue of
SWM in Sri Lanka is described in the figure below.
Time
Short term Long term
Technical Needs
Type of assistance
Target: Central government, Provincial

council and Priority LAs
Preparatory
Survey
Planning M/P & F/S

Facility Development
Target: Western province, Colombo district
and WMA
Figure 6-5: The schedule of improvement of SWM in short-term and mid-term

The following shall be undertaken by the Sri Lankan side if there is any project and / or
assistance from a donor agency
 Selection of execution body of project
 Making consensus of project from stakeholders such as central government ministry
or agency, LAs, citizens and so on.
 Land acquisition of project site
 Securing financial source of operation of facility
The details of assistance are explained as follows.
6.5.2 Technical Needs

The objective of technical needs assistance is to appropriate the SWM system among the
central government, provincial government, and local authorities.
a. Optimization of SWM system among Central government (CEA and

NSWMSC) and Provincial government
The roles, responsibilities and support system of SWM among the NSWMSC, provincial
government and local authorities are optimized. Furthermore, the monitoring capacity of the
CEA in terms of SWM is enhanced during the technical cooperation project.
b. Optimization of SWM of Local Authorities

The technical system and organization of SWM of local authorities are optimized. Moreover,
the 3Rs are introduced properly during the technical cooperation project.
b.1 Optimization of technical system

The technical systems of storage, discharge, collection, transfer and disposal of waste are
optimized as follows:
• Storage/discharge: Dissemination of proper self-disposal method, establishment and
277
dissemination of proper discharge rule

• Collection/transfer: Enhancement of capacity of maintenance for collection vehicles
and so on.
• Disposal of waste: Improvement of existing disposal site with experience of the
results of SATREPS/ improvement and application of leachate
treatment facility at Nuwara Eliya/ establishment of management
system of new sanitary landfill site
• Data base system: Introducing database system of SWM
b.2 Optimization of organization

The roles, responsibilities and support system such as human resources, facility, equipment
and funds of SWM of local authorities are optimized.
c. Introduction of 3Rs
The 3Rs are introduced to promote the reduction of waste at generation source and to
properly improve the operation of the compost plant and material recovery facility.
• 3Rs at generation source: Introduce the compost barrels and prepare the instruction
manual
• Introduction of collection of recyclable material by community base: Study the
availability of the Japanese group collection system
• Introduce and disseminate separate collection
• Rehabilitation of intermediate treatment facility: Improve and develop existing / new
planned compost plant
• Rehabilitation of material recovery facility: Improve and develop existing / new
planned material recovery facility
d. Optimization of SWM finance system

The SWM finance system is introduced in the SWM master plan and the management of
finance system is supported by the technical cooperation project.
6.5.3 Planning M/P &F/S

The “planning master plan (M/P) and feasibility study (F/S)” of the project, which requires
large initial costs, is carried out to solve the issue of SWM in the Colombo district in the
Western Province.
a. Review of SWM master plan of WMA

The SWM master plan of the WMA is reviewed to improve SWM in the Colombo district in
the Western province as follows:
• Review of SWM including the Colombo MC
• Recommendation of intermediate treatment facility (incinerator, bio gas and high rate
composting) based on the Japanese system
• Recommendation of improvement / development of final disposal site.
• Recommendation of improvement of waste collection capacity
• Formulation or review of SWM master plan at priority local authority
b. Feasibility study of priority project

• Outline design and feasibility study of the intermediate treatment facility
• Outline design and feasibility study of the final disposal site
278
6.5.4 Facility development

Since there are a number of options in the facility, it is recommended to conduct a
pre-feasibility study in order to select the most appropriate treatment method. It is important
that the agreement among the stakeholders including the residents is made after each
stakeholder grasps the scale of the cost burden based on the results of pre-feasibility study.
Then full-scale feasibility study is carried out after making consensus among stakeholders
about the followings.
(1) Regional treatment or individual treatment
(2) Securing the site for the facility
(3) Mechanism of cost sharing in case of regional treatment
 Excution body
 Initial investment cost (subsidy from central government and burden of local
authorities)
 Operation cost (Share of municipality that uses it)

279

Data Collection Survey Sri Lanka SWM PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Data Collection Survey Sri Lanka SWM PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

in Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

Japan International Cooperation Agency

Ten (10) Priority Local Authorities

4 Basic Information of the Priority Local Authorities..................................48

5 Projection of Waste Generation Amount and Waste Composition .......233

6 Possibility of Support for Solid Waste Management ............................240

Figure 1-1: Flow chart to select 10 priority local authorities .................................................................. 4

ACLG Assistant Commissioner of Local Government

Exchange rate： 1LKR = 0.871Yen (October, 2015)

1 Background and Objective of Survey

Pilisaru Programme (2008) by Central Environmental Authority (CEA) under Ministry of

1.3 Outline of the survey

1.4 Survey period

1.5 Survey area

1.5.1 Selection of survey candidates local authority

1.5.2 Priority local authority

Survey candidates 33 LAs

Figure 1-1: Flow chart to select 10 priority local authorities

Table 1-3: Criteria to select 10 priority local authorities

Table 1-4: Evaluation of 33 local authorities as survey candidate

Priority of SWM Urban function Issue

1.6 Government organization, institute and local authority to be studies

1.7 Survey schedule

•Period：End of July, 2015 - Beginning of October, 2015

•Period：Beginning of October, 2015 - Middle of January, 2016

•Period：Middle of January, 2016 - End of February, 2016

Detail survey schedule is as follows:

B.2 Data Collection on SWM and Clarification of the Assistance Needs

Data collection survey in Preferred local authority

Idenfication of issues and data collection on technologies and

Figure 1-2: Survey schedule

2 Basic Information of the Democratic Socialist Republic of

Table 2-1: General information of Sri Lanka

2.2 Natural environmental condition

2.3 Socio-Economic Conditions

2.3.1 Social Conditions

sector and 1.9% of GDP for the education sector.

2.3.2 Economic Conditions

2.3.3 Penetration of Japanese-affiliated Companies into the Country

Table 2-6: List of Japanese-affiliated Companies Operating in Sri Lanka

Penta-Ocean Construction Sanken Construction Shin Nippon Lanka

Figure 2-1: Share of Companies by Operated Years in Sri Lanka

2.4 Administrative Division

which are in turn subdivided into Grama Niladhari (GN) Divisions.

Figure 2-2: Diagram of Government Agency Relationship in Sri Lanka2

2.5 Institutional System According to the Waste Management

2.5.1 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions

a. Central Government Agencies

Related Agencies Role and Jurisdiction

Related Agencies Role and Jurisdiction

Figure 2-3: Organizational Chart of the NSWMSC6

Figure 2-4: Organizational Chart of the CEA7

b. Local Government Agencies

2.5.2 Jurisdiction and Role of Related Institutions in Western Province

Related Agencies Role and Jurisdiction

Figure 2-5: Organizational Chart of the WMA9

3 Current Status and Issues of the Solid Waste Management

3.2 Laws and Regulations related to Waste

3.2.1 Waste Management

the NEA to overcome delays in enforcement actions. No amendment components address

 Common wastewater (industrial or sewage) treatment plants

Table 3-3: Environmental Standards Related to SWM